4 ms·
There are lots of good ideas floating around for a second CL standard. The problem is, either such a language has a CL compatibility environment, in which case
by ScottBurson 6y ago
There are lots of good ideas floating around for a second CL standard. The problem is, either such a language has a CL compatibility environment, in which case it is probably implemented in CL using the features already in the language, meaning that it's really just another Quicklisp package; or it doesn't, in which case it has to fill some need that couldn't be filled the first way in order to attract a critical mass of interest. Julia is the closest thing I'm aware of to the latter.
It's hard to get people to switch from something they find good enough for their needs, if the new thing is incompatible. See: Perl 6.
- lizmat 6y agoIn the case of Perl 6 this has resulted in a rename of the language to Raku (https://raku.org https://raku.org using the #rakulang tag on social media). An experience I would not recommend.