3 ms·
Nice comparison. But makes me think we'd be better off if we all just focused on a single one, and grew it, made it better. Not having 4 versions of something
by FrustratedMonky 5mo ago
Nice comparison.
But makes me think we'd be better off if we all just focused on a single one, and grew it, made it better. Not having 4 versions of something almost identical. Fragmentation can hurt adoption.
- db48x 5mo agoThat’s what Common Lisp is.
- MathMonkeyMan 5mo agoYou got downvoted, but you're correct. Obligatory XKCD: <https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/> Personally I prefer lisp 1 languages, like scheme. Even there, though, there was a split over r6rs, so we got a bunch of mostly-like-r5rs schemes and racket. Maybe the problem is that lisps are no longer popular enough to have a winning implementation! If there is one, though, then it's Common Lisp on SBCL.
- erichocean 5mo agoThere are deep reasons for the variations, especially around (reader) macros.
- ludston 5mo agoThey are as different from one another as Java is from C# is from JavaScript.
- FrustratedMonky 5mo agoSo, not by much?