3 ms·

You have to define mainstream, and it's hard to quantify things when there is no data. If you use statistics from Github[1], there is a strong argument to be ma

by natrys 3y ago

You have to define mainstream, and it's hard to quantify things when there is no data. If you use statistics from Github[1], there is a strong argument to be made that the most mainstream Lisp is actually .... Emacs Lisp. [1] https://madnight.github.io/githut/#/pushes/2023/4 https://madnight.github.io/githut/#/pushes/2023/4

aidenn0 3y ago
That's going to be biased a bit by people putting their dotfiles in github. It shows Clojure with 4x the share of CL though. Lisp-1's hurt my brain though, so I haven't dabbled in it much.
- koito17 3y ago
  > Lisp-1's hurt my brain though No worries! (defn cl-funcall [function & args] (apply function args)) Jokes aside, I've written a significant amount of software in Common Lisp and Clojure. The Lisp-1 vs Lisp-2 distinction isn't something that bothers me. It used to, as a beginner with strong opinions on everything. But nowadays? I don't even remember the last time I've heard Lisp-n before reading this comment.
  - aidenn0 3y ago
    I'm just too used to naming variables things like "list" Having variables that shadow functions, that are later used somewhere causes rather inscrutable jvm backtraces to appear in Clojure.
    - koito17 3y ago
      If you use the CIDER debugger then this doesn't appear to be a big issue. Try step debugging the following function. I get an IFn related exception right as the call to (list name) is made. (defn f [name list] #dbg (concat list (list name))) (f 'alice '(bob))
- natrys 3y ago
  That's true, although my 10k loc elisp config will be the last thing I will ever put on Github. Way too personal ;) Incidentally elisp does a lot better in new Issue count too, although clojure narrowly beats it PR count. On the whole though, I think if you define mainstream to be number of people using it, then elisp probably edges clojure.

3 ms·

You have to define mainstream, and it's hard to quantify things when there is no data. If you use statistics from Github[1], there is a strong argument to be ma

by natrys 3y ago

aidenn0 3y ago
That's going to be biased a bit by people putting their dotfiles in github. It shows Clojure with 4x the share of CL though. Lisp-1's hurt my brain though, so I haven't dabbled in it much.
- koito17 3y ago
  > Lisp-1's hurt my brain though No worries! (defn cl-funcall [function & args] (apply function args)) Jokes aside, I've written a significant amount of software in Common Lisp and Clojure. The Lisp-1 vs Lisp-2 distinction isn't something that bothers me. It used to, as a beginner with strong opinions on everything. But nowadays? I don't even remember the last time I've heard Lisp-n before reading this comment.
  - aidenn0 3y ago
    I'm just too used to naming variables things like "list" Having variables that shadow functions, that are later used somewhere causes rather inscrutable jvm backtraces to appear in Clojure.
    - koito17 3y ago
      If you use the CIDER debugger then this doesn't appear to be a big issue. Try step debugging the following function. I get an IFn related exception right as the call to (list name) is made. (defn f [name list] #dbg (concat list (list name))) (f 'alice '(bob))
- natrys 3y ago
  That's true, although my 10k loc elisp config will be the last thing I will ever put on Github. Way too personal ;) Incidentally elisp does a lot better in new Issue count too, although clojure narrowly beats it PR count. On the whole though, I think if you define mainstream to be number of people using it, then elisp probably edges clojure.