4 ms·
Yeah, when I wrote the comment, I kinda guessed that people would point out the zombie-like state of living for these languages. That's only barely being alive,
by vesak 8y ago
Yeah, when I wrote the comment, I kinda guessed that people would point out the zombie-like state of living for these languages. That's only barely being alive, though, and very much faded.
(I did have C in there but edited it out. I don't think that's a dead language yet.)
- AnimalMuppet 8y agoBut isn't Lisp almost as zombie-like as Perl or COBOL? (4GL I'll probably give you...)
- vesak 8y agoWell, yes :) And 4GL languages are actively being used to create new business, so who knows what's dead and what's not. Perhaps the whole programming field is just a bunch of undead things. Sometimes a bunch of living things stumble upon the field, but they're soon infected...
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- jhomedall 8y agoThere are several implementations of Common Lisp that are still being actively developed. Because Common Lisp is so easily extended, the ossification of the standard is actually a good thing. The stability of the standard means that code written 30 years ago will still work today. Feature updates aren't required, because any desired feature can be implemented in macros and imported as a library.