4 ms·

I mean why use anything for anything, since another thing already exists. Look I like common lisp just fine and have used it for serious professional work and

I mean why use anything for anything, since another thing already exists. Look I like common lisp just fine and have used it for serious professional work and value it for its practical strength and longevity. It is gnarly though, and a pain in the ass sometimes, and really pretty hard to onboard people into. It's huge, and the intense focus on backwards compatibility means there are huge swathes of the language you won't use, some that possible no one should use. If you've already put the time in to learn all that then yeah sure why would you use this. But most people interested in lisps haven't spent hundreds of hours trudging through common lisp already, so maybe this is more for them.

andsoitis 4y ago
> I mean why use anything for anything, since another thing already exists. My question was to figure out WHY this might be better than the solutions that already exist, which I think is a fair question. If you're always going after the new thing without it having known / expected advantages, aren't you setting yourself up for pain?
mst 4y ago
Is there a "common lisp - the good parts" style thing that a decent percentage of users agree on? (I've done scheme and a few others with great enjoyment and repeatedly bounced off common lisp, so I'm very much aware of the extent to which "lisp users agreeing on things" is a substantial ask, but it seemed worth a try even so ;)