3 ms·
It's not a perfectly reliable tell, but people who write LISP instead of Lisp generally give themselves away as knowing nothing about the language. Why not kick
by Jach 2y ago
It's not a perfectly reliable tell, but people who write LISP instead of Lisp generally give themselves away as knowing nothing about the language. Why not kick the tires with Common Lisp, or even Clojure, and see if you can then understand for yourself why it sparks joy in people? I'm not saying it'll spark joy in you, just that you might understand. (Do you understand Haskell's draw to certain people? Rust's?) At the very least, perhaps you'll lose your notion that it primarily appeals to academic types. Common Lisp is and always has been an industrial language.
"Please don't assume Lisp is only useful for Animation and Graphics, AI, Bioinformatics, B2B and E-Commerce, Data Mining, EDA/Semiconductor applications, Expert Systems, Finance, Intelligent Agents, Knowledge Management, Mechanical CAD, Modeling and Simulation, Natural Language, Optimization, Research, Risk Analysis, Scheduling, Telecom, and Web Authoring just because these are the only things they happened to list."
--Kent Pitman
- NAHWheatCracker 2y agoMy only personal experience writing with Lisp was Scheme, which I wrote for two weeks back in college 18 years ago, so I truly know nothing about the language. In retrospect, saying I don't understand was hyperbolic. Of course I understand that people have their preferred languages. The handful of languages I've used in my career each have their draw. My comment was meant more to question the assertion that Lisp is the-right-thing, which sounds like asserting the-right-religion.