Well, that's just plain stupid. When will people who don't get Lisp acknowledge, that the syntax is that way on purpose, to allow easy metaprogramming? It's not a bug, it's a feature!! When I program in other languages,…
>> Because the people who "get" Lisp are almost always theoreticians who know what they want to code before they code it. Nope, actually it's the other way around. People write a lot of prototypes which they…
http://common-lisp.net/project/parenscript/ to the rescue!
Common Lisp is not a research language. The goal of the comitee was to produce a language fit to industry needs.
couldn't find prices for their services on the page
You are absolutely right, every single feature has been adopted except - macros (which is bloody enough to stay Lisp wonderland). Errr, and maybe the best OO system ever designed. And maybe awesome metaobject protocol…
We can hardly argue about CL when you know nothing about it. Your "arguments" seemed like common set of misconceptions about CL, the "LISP is slow" is such a folklore that I thought you forgot to write it, that's all.
You clearly haven't used the language on real world project. In CL world, there is enough people interested to develop actively several implementations. Also, you (as others making opinion on language from blog posts)…
So, you have "heard", really, I am amazed. You must really know a lot about it. Repeating your broken popularity based measurement applied to different group of people does not make it any more correct, sorry.
> already has more useful software being written in than CL. Like what? Those crippled Java wrappers? > CL is a failure, admit it. You are a failure, admit it. Since you are not popular (I don't know who you…
Well, that's just plain stupid. When will people who don't get Lisp acknowledge, that the syntax is that way on purpose, to allow easy metaprogramming? It's not a bug, it's a feature!! When I program in other languages,…
>> Because the people who "get" Lisp are almost always theoreticians who know what they want to code before they code it. Nope, actually it's the other way around. People write a lot of prototypes which they…
http://common-lisp.net/project/parenscript/ to the rescue!
Common Lisp is not a research language. The goal of the comitee was to produce a language fit to industry needs.
couldn't find prices for their services on the page
You are absolutely right, every single feature has been adopted except - macros (which is bloody enough to stay Lisp wonderland). Errr, and maybe the best OO system ever designed. And maybe awesome metaobject protocol…
We can hardly argue about CL when you know nothing about it. Your "arguments" seemed like common set of misconceptions about CL, the "LISP is slow" is such a folklore that I thought you forgot to write it, that's all.
You clearly haven't used the language on real world project. In CL world, there is enough people interested to develop actively several implementations. Also, you (as others making opinion on language from blog posts)…
So, you have "heard", really, I am amazed. You must really know a lot about it. Repeating your broken popularity based measurement applied to different group of people does not make it any more correct, sorry.
> already has more useful software being written in than CL. Like what? Those crippled Java wrappers? > CL is a failure, admit it. You are a failure, admit it. Since you are not popular (I don't know who you…