5 ms·

I think it proved its superiority many times. Its just that certain people couldn't admit it to themselves. Other langs are just a great way to ignore cold hard

I think it proved its superiority many times. Its just that certain people couldn't admit it to themselves. Other langs are just a great way to ignore cold hard engineering facts and give grunt-work developers a feeling of perfection. Of course you don't need a lisp to build CRUD apps. Companies don't want to depend on highly trained engineers either. I don't care for being cheap though. I'd rather know 10% of lisp than 100% of yet another dead-end language.

AnimalMuppet 13y ago
Yes! Lisp is the superior language! The only reason it doesn't dominate all others is that most programmers are too stupid to see how wonderful Lisp is! Ahem. You'd be somewhat more persuasive if you dropped the arrogance and stopped assuming that those who disagree with you are self-deceived fools.
- calroc 13y ago
  Except this: "Yes! Lisp is the superior language! The only reason it doesn't dominate all others is that most programmers are too stupid to see how wonderful Lisp is!" ...is exactly right. Not even hyperbole. Exactly right. I was a fool until I understood LISP. The arrogance is warranted. One is a fool at least until getting LISP, this is not an assumption but a statement of fact. (I actually got mad once I got LISP because I understood the awful waste that exists in the form of non-LISP languages.)
- mrottenkolber 13y ago
  Why then do you criticize the tone and not the argument. Again: Non-lispers are cheaper that lispers, thus it is not in the industries interest to have enlightened engineers, because for 90% of the business you don't require the enlighentment.
  - AnimalMuppet 13y ago
    Why do I criticize the tone and not the argument? Because there isn't much argument there. (Note well: I did not say that there isn't much in the argument to criticize. You haven't given much of an argument - just a smug assumption of superiority, and that's all. I criticize the tone because that's all that's there.) If you want to persuade people, give them a reason to believe what you say. "Believe me because I'm smart and you're stupid" is not a persuasive argument. If you don't want to persuade people, if you just want to wallow in your superiority in your self-imposed ghetto, that's your business. But if so, would you mind not wasting our time with your statements of superiority? And: Non-lispers are cheaper than lispers? Perhaps the average lisper is better paid than the average non-lisper. Did you control for years of experience and such? And if for 90% of the business you don't need people who know lisp, then maybe lisp isn't the best tool for the job except in 10% of the cases. Maybe you should stop thinking it's best for everybody?
    - mrottenkolber 13y ago
      Look, I don't want to persuade anybody. If you are interested in why I am so smug just give Lisp a try, if that same smugness puts you off, no problem, nobody minds. I am smug because people rather dare to criticize me that way. Not cheaper in terms of salary. Cheaper in time needed to train. You can use e.g. Python or Ruby without knowing how its implemented (if you knew you wouldn't use it). A Lisp programmer automatically needs to be a full stack developer, or at least conscious about the stack, because he is operating a compiler framework. It has lots to do with circular definition and choosing the right tools bottom up. For instance, most of CL can be and is implemented using a core part of the language. What that core is can differ from implementation to implementation. So the barrier between user and creator is very small in Lisp, thats what makes it so powerful and demands its users to be well trained in many aspects of software systems. I think the more knowledge you have of your environment, the better you can solve a problem in it. So I think most programming problems can be better solved in a lisp than in any other language (so far).
      - AnimalMuppet 13y ago
        If I knew how Python or Ruby was implemented, I wouldn't use it? BS. I'd use it if, weaknesses and all, it was good enough to be useful for what I was trying to do. Anything else is posturing.
bjourne 13y ago
I'm curious if you, and other lispers, do acknowledge the possibility of there being languages whose users are rightfully even more smug than them? You think that you are enlightened and have seen lisp being superior. Yet perhaps you have only opened the first door and there is a whole world of even more powerful and algebraic programming abstractions you aren't aware of?

AnimalMuppet 13y ago

Yes! Lisp is the superior language! The only reason it doesn't dominate all others is that most programmers are too stupid to see how wonderful Lisp is! Ahem. You'd be somewhat more persuasive if you dropped the arrogance and stopped assuming that those who disagree with you are self-deceived fools.

calroc 13y ago
Except this: "Yes! Lisp is the superior language! The only reason it doesn't dominate all others is that most programmers are too stupid to see how wonderful Lisp is!" ...is exactly right. Not even hyperbole. Exactly right. I was a fool until I understood LISP. The arrogance is warranted. One is a fool at least until getting LISP, this is not an assumption but a statement of fact. (I actually got mad once I got LISP because I understood the awful waste that exists in the form of non-LISP languages.)
mrottenkolber 13y ago
Why then do you criticize the tone and not the argument. Again: Non-lispers are cheaper that lispers, thus it is not in the industries interest to have enlightened engineers, because for 90% of the business you don't require the enlighentment.
- AnimalMuppet 13y ago
  Why do I criticize the tone and not the argument? Because there isn't much argument there. (Note well: I did not say that there isn't much in the argument to criticize. You haven't given much of an argument - just a smug assumption of superiority, and that's all. I criticize the tone because that's all that's there.) If you want to persuade people, give them a reason to believe what you say. "Believe me because I'm smart and you're stupid" is not a persuasive argument. If you don't want to persuade people, if you just want to wallow in your superiority in your self-imposed ghetto, that's your business. But if so, would you mind not wasting our time with your statements of superiority? And: Non-lispers are cheaper than lispers? Perhaps the average lisper is better paid than the average non-lisper. Did you control for years of experience and such? And if for 90% of the business you don't need people who know lisp, then maybe lisp isn't the best tool for the job except in 10% of the cases. Maybe you should stop thinking it's best for everybody?
  - mrottenkolber 13y ago
    Look, I don't want to persuade anybody. If you are interested in why I am so smug just give Lisp a try, if that same smugness puts you off, no problem, nobody minds. I am smug because people rather dare to criticize me that way. Not cheaper in terms of salary. Cheaper in time needed to train. You can use e.g. Python or Ruby without knowing how its implemented (if you knew you wouldn't use it). A Lisp programmer automatically needs to be a full stack developer, or at least conscious about the stack, because he is operating a compiler framework. It has lots to do with circular definition and choosing the right tools bottom up. For instance, most of CL can be and is implemented using a core part of the language. What that core is can differ from implementation to implementation. So the barrier between user and creator is very small in Lisp, thats what makes it so powerful and demands its users to be well trained in many aspects of software systems. I think the more knowledge you have of your environment, the better you can solve a problem in it. So I think most programming problems can be better solved in a lisp than in any other language (so far).
    - AnimalMuppet 13y ago
      If I knew how Python or Ruby was implemented, I wouldn't use it? BS. I'd use it if, weaknesses and all, it was good enough to be useful for what I was trying to do. Anything else is posturing.

bjourne 13y ago

I'm curious if you, and other lispers, do acknowledge the possibility of there being languages whose users are rightfully even more smug than them? You think that you are enlightened and have seen lisp being superior. Yet perhaps you have only opened the first door and there is a whole world of even more powerful and algebraic programming abstractions you aren't aware of?