4 ms·

They're looking at it from the point of one to a few coders and you're looking at it from an industrial view with larger teams. I think it probably shines more

They're looking at it from the point of one to a few coders and you're looking at it from an industrial view with larger teams. I think it probably shines more in the former. If macros aren't overused, it's probably not all that different from other dynamic languages like Python that work fine with larger teams.

sametmax 8y ago
It is very different than Python. In Lisp, they say "here is a tool that can do anything. Have fun". In Python they say: "here are many tools that are specific and limited to that purpose. Also you gona take bad decisions, so we limited it some more". The first approach is appealing to very good programmers. The second one, to anybody who had to work with the vast majority of normal programmers. I prefer the second one. People abuse macros, make way to long lambdas, don't document their magic and indent poorly if they are not forced to. Since tooling is something people always learn too late, I'm going with the language with sane defaults.
- kyancey 8y ago
  The first approach is also appealing to very bad programmers who think they're good programmers.
- lispm 8y ago
  Yet Common Lisp nicely scales to very large programs, some which have been maintained for decades. MLOC range.
  - sametmax 8y ago
    And I bet you $10k that mostly 10x programmers work on the code base. In fact, I've never seen an average Joe taking interest in Lisp, let alone learning it to the point of making a living with it. And there is a limited pool of that. We, humans, also have work to do.
    - lispm 8y ago
      > I've never seen an average Joe taking interest in Lisp, let alone learning it to the point of making a living with it. Average Joe and Susi have been for 3+ decades nicely programming lots of extensions to AutoCAD and its various clones in Lisp. Generally I agree that Lisp programming is a bit more challenging due to the slight mathematical nature (lambda, ...), code as data and meta-programming. I don't think that one needs to be a 10x programmer to use Lisp - many of those 10x programmers are not programming in Lisp, since the 10x programmer gets hired because he/she might be able to cope with enterprise Java architectures. Since Lisp is a programmer amplifier, you might think that these Lisp users are 10x programmers, when in fact they are not. But there are domains where people are using Lisp, who are not focused on programming. For example there are various Lisp-based music apps + literature which are used by composers. Example: https://opusmodus.com https://opusmodus.com
      - vram22 8y ago
        >Average Joe and Susi have been for 3+ decades nicely programming lots of extensions to AutoCAD and its various clones in Lisp. Ha ha, I read somewhere that years ago, in some org or the other, Emacs Lisp was programmed by secretaries to help them achieve their routine tasks. Apparently they were not told that it was "too difficult for them" :)
        ACE_Recliner 8y ago
        Bit late, but it was Multics Emacs and the language they were writing in was Maclisp.
      - emmanueloga_ 8y ago
        Wow this opus modus tool looks super polished. I'd not mind paying for it, if it ran on windows! I've heard about other tools like this before ([1] for composition, [2] for synthesis, [3] for mind-blowing :-p) but somehow never heard about opus modus before. * Where did you learn about it? * Are there other similar prog-lang music production tools with similar level of polish? * Any cross-platform / Windows supported tools? -- unfortunately opus modus only runs on macs :-( 1: https://github.com/ctford/leipzig https://github.com/ctford/leipzig 2: https://github.com/overtone/overtone https://github.com/overtone/overtone 3: https://extemporelang.github.io/ https://extemporelang.github.io/

sametmax 8y ago

It is very different than Python. In Lisp, they say "here is a tool that can do anything. Have fun". In Python they say: "here are many tools that are specific and limited to that purpose. Also you gona take bad decisions, so we limited it some more". The first approach is appealing to very good programmers. The second one, to anybody who had to work with the vast majority of normal programmers. I prefer the second one. People abuse macros, make way to long lambdas, don't document their magic and indent poorly if they are not forced to. Since tooling is something people always learn too late, I'm going with the language with sane defaults.

kyancey 8y ago
The first approach is also appealing to very bad programmers who think they're good programmers.
lispm 8y ago
Yet Common Lisp nicely scales to very large programs, some which have been maintained for decades. MLOC range.
- sametmax 8y ago
  And I bet you $10k that mostly 10x programmers work on the code base. In fact, I've never seen an average Joe taking interest in Lisp, let alone learning it to the point of making a living with it. And there is a limited pool of that. We, humans, also have work to do.
  - lispm 8y ago
    > I've never seen an average Joe taking interest in Lisp, let alone learning it to the point of making a living with it. Average Joe and Susi have been for 3+ decades nicely programming lots of extensions to AutoCAD and its various clones in Lisp. Generally I agree that Lisp programming is a bit more challenging due to the slight mathematical nature (lambda, ...), code as data and meta-programming. I don't think that one needs to be a 10x programmer to use Lisp - many of those 10x programmers are not programming in Lisp, since the 10x programmer gets hired because he/she might be able to cope with enterprise Java architectures. Since Lisp is a programmer amplifier, you might think that these Lisp users are 10x programmers, when in fact they are not. But there are domains where people are using Lisp, who are not focused on programming. For example there are various Lisp-based music apps + literature which are used by composers. Example: https://opusmodus.com https://opusmodus.com
    - vram22 8y ago
      >Average Joe and Susi have been for 3+ decades nicely programming lots of extensions to AutoCAD and its various clones in Lisp. Ha ha, I read somewhere that years ago, in some org or the other, Emacs Lisp was programmed by secretaries to help them achieve their routine tasks. Apparently they were not told that it was "too difficult for them" :)
      - ACE_Recliner 8y ago
        Bit late, but it was Multics Emacs and the language they were writing in was Maclisp.
    - emmanueloga_ 8y ago
      Wow this opus modus tool looks super polished. I'd not mind paying for it, if it ran on windows! I've heard about other tools like this before ([1] for composition, [2] for synthesis, [3] for mind-blowing :-p) but somehow never heard about opus modus before. * Where did you learn about it? * Are there other similar prog-lang music production tools with similar level of polish? * Any cross-platform / Windows supported tools? -- unfortunately opus modus only runs on macs :-( 1: https://github.com/ctford/leipzig https://github.com/ctford/leipzig 2: https://github.com/overtone/overtone https://github.com/overtone/overtone 3: https://extemporelang.github.io/ https://extemporelang.github.io/