3 ms·
Part of this is that when Lisps started ALL other languages were very low level and the hardware that the Lisps were running on did not afford to waste any memo
by lmilcin 5y ago
Part of this is that when Lisps started ALL other languages were very low level and the hardware that the Lisps were running on did not afford to waste any memory or cycles.
So efficiency was an important consideration right from the start.
Other languages that most people use today grew at later times (borrowing from Lisp) when the resources wasn't such a big deal.
I consider languages like PHP, Ruby and Python peak examples of mainstream languages that were created with barely any consideration for efficiency. This coincides with 1990s and early 2000s where we saw dramatic increase of system resources and especially memory without much need to use it efficiently.
Nowadays it improved a little bit as we learn to run bigger loads so newer mainstream languages (like Rust) and some older (like Java, C# or JavaScript) are putting more effort on efficiency.
- pjmlp 5y agoIndeed, when someone points out "you cannot do that because...", I feel the urge to point them out to what was happening on 1960's hardware and how much their watch outperforms a Connection Machine.
- agumonkey 5y agothe memory capacity of society is astonishingly low
- agumonkey 5y agoChristian Queinnec (Lisp in Small Pieces author) vaguely mentions that all dynamic languages are lisp under various clothings.