4 ms·

The "Blub" parable is really clever because it says that when other people doesn't use Lisp, it is simply because they are incapable of understanding its power

by goto11 6y ago

The "Blub" parable is really clever because it says that when other people doesn't use Lisp, it is simply because they are incapable of understanding its power - not because of any practical or technical reason to chose another language. So any argument the "Blub" programmers might use to justify "Blub" is automatically invalid. Of course it can be used for any non-mainstream language, and I have seen it used for Haskell, where Lisp is the "Blub" language.

exdsq 6y ago
I’ve had this recently. Was writing Python but missed the ease of concurrent functional programming. Used F# but missed type classes. Used Haskell but missed dependant types. Use Idris but miss the build environment of Python.
- bcrosby95 6y ago
  Yes, once you learn enough languages I feel like you just find yourself constantly wishing you had aspects of another language, pretty much regardless of what language you're using. Sometimes its directly related to the language, sometimes its something like the ecosystem surrounding it. This is why I'm wary of "right tool for the job" when it comes to languages. In my experience usually there isn't a singular obvious right language. Maybe one is 35% right, another is 38% right, and the golden ticket language is actually just 45% right. And sometimes you won't really know until you're halfway through the project. If you wanted a 100% singular obvious correct language, you would have to make a custom language with traits from a dozen different ones. But in the real world, the differences between languages you can actually choose from end up being not that large.
  - AnimalMuppet 6y ago
    I think of languages as a multi-dimensional tree, with branches extending in different directions. I think that the trick is to figure out what the yak-shaving aspects of the project are going to be (which you can think of as a vector), and picking the language that goes the furthest in the direction of that vector (and thereby does the most to minimize the yak-shaving). This requires that you be able to fairly accurately determine what the yak-shaving will be up front (which can be problematic).
- whateveracct 6y ago
  > Used Haskell but missed dependant types. They're coming :)
  - exdsq 6y ago
    Oooh is there a link to the work/who’s working on it?
    - whateveracct 6y ago
      https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/wikis/dependent-haskell https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/wikis/dependent-haskell ^ this has a bunch of info + external links. Richard Eisenberg is the one owning it afaiu. I think there's also a GHC branch somewhere but idr its name.
marcosdumay 6y ago
Hum... The Blub parable is really clever because it surfaces the very real problem that a programmer that don't know a language can not predict the benefits or problems of using that language. I don't see how people (you are the 3rd I see here) get the impression it's a Lisp-only comparison. PG very clearly says he has no idea what language should be on top, and even if there is a top at all. And even if he didn't, that would just make him a practical example of the paradox, and wouldn't make the idea any less valid.
- goto11 6y ago
  In context (http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html) he specifically states that he think Lisp is at the top of the power continuum. The point of the Blup-parable is to explain why Lisp isn't that popular when it is so amazing.
  - marcosdumay 6y ago
    Ok, after reading it again, by "very clear" I was overstating it, but there is this note: > [4] Note to nerds: or possibly a lattice, narrowing toward the top; it's not the shape that matters here but the idea that there is at least a partial order. And in no place he says Lisp is the end-all best language. At most he compares it with other languages his competitors used on the context of Viaweb, what on the bottom of the article means C++, Java, Perl and Python. He indeed goes on to argue that any language more powerful than Lisp would be Lisp, because macros work that way. If you don't take notice that he is simplifying things into a power continuum to make a point, that can mislead you into the message that Lisp is the most powerful language. But he puts some effort into making the message language agnostic.
    - int_19h 6y ago
      Is Forth Lisp? Given that you can control the reader, everything is possible syntactically, and semantics is entirely what you make it.
      - 6y ago

by goto11 6y ago

exdsq 6y ago

I’ve had this recently. Was writing Python but missed the ease of concurrent functional programming. Used F# but missed type classes. Used Haskell but missed dependant types. Use Idris but miss the build environment of Python.

bcrosby95 6y ago
Yes, once you learn enough languages I feel like you just find yourself constantly wishing you had aspects of another language, pretty much regardless of what language you're using. Sometimes its directly related to the language, sometimes its something like the ecosystem surrounding it. This is why I'm wary of "right tool for the job" when it comes to languages. In my experience usually there isn't a singular obvious right language. Maybe one is 35% right, another is 38% right, and the golden ticket language is actually just 45% right. And sometimes you won't really know until you're halfway through the project. If you wanted a 100% singular obvious correct language, you would have to make a custom language with traits from a dozen different ones. But in the real world, the differences between languages you can actually choose from end up being not that large.
- AnimalMuppet 6y ago
  I think of languages as a multi-dimensional tree, with branches extending in different directions. I think that the trick is to figure out what the yak-shaving aspects of the project are going to be (which you can think of as a vector), and picking the language that goes the furthest in the direction of that vector (and thereby does the most to minimize the yak-shaving). This requires that you be able to fairly accurately determine what the yak-shaving will be up front (which can be problematic).
whateveracct 6y ago
> Used Haskell but missed dependant types. They're coming :)
- exdsq 6y ago
  Oooh is there a link to the work/who’s working on it?
  - whateveracct 6y ago
    https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/wikis/dependent-haskell https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/wikis/dependent-haskell ^ this has a bunch of info + external links. Richard Eisenberg is the one owning it afaiu. I think there's also a GHC branch somewhere but idr its name.

marcosdumay 6y ago

Hum... The Blub parable is really clever because it surfaces the very real problem that a programmer that don't know a language can not predict the benefits or problems of using that language. I don't see how people (you are the 3rd I see here) get the impression it's a Lisp-only comparison. PG very clearly says he has no idea what language should be on top, and even if there is a top at all. And even if he didn't, that would just make him a practical example of the paradox, and wouldn't make the idea any less valid.

goto11 6y ago
In context (http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html) he specifically states that he think Lisp is at the top of the power continuum. The point of the Blup-parable is to explain why Lisp isn't that popular when it is so amazing.
- marcosdumay 6y ago
  Ok, after reading it again, by "very clear" I was overstating it, but there is this note: > [4] Note to nerds: or possibly a lattice, narrowing toward the top; it's not the shape that matters here but the idea that there is at least a partial order. And in no place he says Lisp is the end-all best language. At most he compares it with other languages his competitors used on the context of Viaweb, what on the bottom of the article means C++, Java, Perl and Python. He indeed goes on to argue that any language more powerful than Lisp would be Lisp, because macros work that way. If you don't take notice that he is simplifying things into a power continuum to make a point, that can mislead you into the message that Lisp is the most powerful language. But he puts some effort into making the message language agnostic.
  - int_19h 6y ago
    Is Forth Lisp? Given that you can control the reader, everything is possible syntactically, and semantics is entirely what you make it.
    - 6y ago