> might not be able to achieve performance similar to a "zero-cost abstraction" language like Rust That might be the case, even though SBCL might have some per

> might not be able to achieve performance similar to a "zero-cost abstraction" language like Rust That might be the case, even though SBCL might have some performance improving features, like a runtime compiler (which can be used to improve performance at runtime) and the capability to implement assembler extensions to the compiler from Lisp. > There's an argument to be made for this approach, at least for software that's run on customers' computer. For server side software, I can see why having always-available debuggability is useful. I see no reason, why this should not be useful on the client side, too. Many software systems on the client side have ways to extend them. Doing this in the main implementation language can have advantages, instead of doing it in a limited macro or scripting language.