> I've no complaint with this, but it leads to the mistaken impression that great applications are written in dynamic languages. They aren't. Great prototypes a

> I've no complaint with this, but it leads to the mistaken impression that great applications are written in dynamic languages. They aren't. Great prototypes are written in dynamic languages, but the lasting replacement will be written in a dull typed language like Java/C++/C#. Common Lisp is the only programming language I know of that provides both the prototyping power of dynamic languages and the execution power of static languages. This is achieved through the Lisp declarations system. The maxima computer algebra system also offers a variety of algebraic declarations such as linear, additive, multiplicative, outative, evenfun, oddfun, commutative, symmetric, antisymmetric, nary, lassociative, and rassociative. In my opinion all programs should be written this way - the Lisp way. > So far my fondness with Scheme has coexisted with disappointment at its unsuitability for real world tasks I am fond of Scheme, Kernel, Arc, Shen and many other Lisp dialects. The unsuitability of these languages for real world tasks can be solved to some extent by embedding them in a larger host platform. Clojure does the embedding approach quite nicely.