3 ms·
That, and google has an aversion to common lisp... so it would need to be a rewrite. EDIT: Mind you, I've only heard of the aversion to lisp, so have no data t
by jurjenh 16y ago
That, and google has an aversion to common lisp... so it would need to be a rewrite.
EDIT: Mind you, I've only heard of the aversion to lisp, so have no data to back my claim up. That said, it has been mentioned several times on HN: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1282583 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1282583 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=363023 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=363023
- avar 16y agoThe example that is usually brought up is one guy at Google (Erann Gat) that had one conversation with his manager that ended in a "No". That's completely different to Google buying an existing business for $700 million whose core tech is written in Lisp.
- mkramlich 16y agoI don't think they'd have an aversion to buying a piece of legacy software written in Lisp if said software had a proven revenue stream and was part of the core underpinning to a major category of search they want to get into more. However, it's reasonable for them to be averse to writing totally new projects in Lisp, in-house, because when you're at a huge company as a general rule you don't want dozens of different languages in use: it's inefficient and you lose out on a lot of opportunities to leverage skills across teams and across service layers if you do that. Lisp, from what I heard, didn't make the cut, despite it's strengths. They still allow a few though, and I believe they are Python, JavaScript, Java and C/C++.