Are we close to a Lisp boom ?
in [Lisp]
|
Prev: ANN: SymbolicWeb v0.1 (quite alpha) w/ source code this time
Next: Greenspunning ML (revisited)
From: John Thingstad on 4 May 2008 13:09 P� Sun, 04 May 2008 05:08:43 +0200, skrev <scholz.lothar(a)gmail.com>: > On 3 Mai, 21:34, Spiros Bousbouras <spi...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> If it's true that as we progress in time, successive >> fashionable languages resemble Lisp more and >> more then Lisp's turn should come at some point. >> >> Do you agree with this argument ? If yes, would >> you say we're close to a Lisp boom ? > > Without Unicode support, Windows Ports, true Multithreading i think > definietly not. Of course my LispWorks system supports all of the above.. It does not do 'symmetric' multiprocessing if that is what you mean. I might add that none of these things are a part of the C standard either. That hasn't prevented C from being a popular language. Common Lisp is just a common denominator for Lisp's. Commercial versions like LispWorks and ACL come with large libraries in addition to ANSI Common Lisp. As it is - it is strong enough to write real applications today. -------------- John Thingstad
From: Peter Hildebrandt on 6 May 2008 13:14 On Tue, 06 May 2008 18:13:21 +0200, <plamen.usenet(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On May 3, 8:30 pm, Ken Tilton <kennytil...(a)optonline.net> wrote: > >> >> What I see happening is India or China discovering CL specifically and >> standardizing on it (er, informally) and crushing the West. Man, that >> would be funny, but not surprising. > > Kenny, if one knows the history, then he knows the future... > > http://home.pipeline.com/~hbaker1/sigplannotices/gigo-1997-04.html Wonderful reading, thanks a lot! :) Peter > Have fun :) > > Plamen Stamov > > P.S. And for newbies - read better the rest of the Baker's articles. -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
From: Ken Tilton on 4 May 2008 13:16 vanekl wrote: > Ken Tilton wrote: > >> >> >> globalrev wrote: >> >>> On 4 Maj, 06:24, vanekl <va...(a)acd.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Ken Tilton wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> vanekl wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Spiros Bousbouras wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>>> If it's true that as we progress in time, successive >>>>>>> fashionable languages resemble Lisp more and >>>>>>> more then Lisp's turn should come at some point. >>>> >>>> >>>>>>> Do you agree with this argument ? If yes, would >>>>>>> you say we're close to a Lisp boom ? >>>> >>>> >>>>>> IMO, not until CL goes through another standardization process, >>>>>> not for the language this time, but for a few libraries: >>>>>> comm, stream, unicode, thread. >>>> >>>> >>>>> Yeah, the damn thing is unusable as it is. >>>> >>>> >>>> unusable? needlessly inconvenient would be a better choice of words, >>>> methinks. Python has its advantages; ignoring them is... never mind. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>> Too bad there isn't a benevolent angel that could fund such >>>>>> an expenditure <hint>PG</hint>. >>>> >>>> >>>>> Nah, he went broke trying to do a start-up with CL, a Web store I >>>>> think. >>>> >>>> >>>> Time to put the cork back in the bottle. The bar is closed. Make sure >>>> you tip your waitress on the way out. Thank you and drive safely. >>>> >>>> >>>>> kt >>> >>> >>> >>> dont know if u misunderstood or not but he is referring to Paul Graham >>> that >>> started Viaweb in 1995 which was sold to Yahoo for around 50million >>> dollars in 1998. >>> Graham is now working on Arc, a Lisp-dialect. >> >> >> He understood, he just could not handle having pointed out to him the >> delightful irony of asking for money to help make Lisp usable from >> someone who got rich USING Lisp thirteen years ago. >> >> But what should we expect from someone who says "You've had too much >> to drink, drive safely."? >> >> :) >> >> kenny > > > Gawd, next time I'll wink and add 10 smiley faces so the slower members > of the group can catch up. Oh. I see. Yeah, your overall drift did elude me. Anyway, I see elsewhere you will be in the vanguard of CL's drive to world domination contributing to (some) Grand Unifying Lisp Web Thingy, so send along a bit of your clothing and we'll train the hounds on you as a "friendly". kenny -- http://smuglispweeny.blogspot.com/ http://www.theoryyalgebra.com/ ECLM rant: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1331906677993764413&hl=en ECLM talk: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9173722505157942928&q=&hl=en
From: Majorinc Kazimir on 4 May 2008 15:01 In article <daadad58-b292-4a26-a63f-35ec24af3450 @k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, philip.armitage(a)gmail.com says... > than a fault of the language itself. As for "average programmer", it's > less clear what that means. If it means programmers who are not Average programmer is say, one who mostly rely on available libraries and only occasionally implement complex algorithms on his own. His programs might be large but they are mostly made of simple pieces that need to be connected together without bugs. I think abstract programming languages provide little advantage for that kind of job; their advantages show mainly if one has to develop and test many original and complicated algorithms - and needs for that decrease due to growing libraries, databases etc. It is not fault of the programming language.
From: pls.mrjm on 4 May 2008 15:25
On 4 Mag, 05:08, scholz.lot...(a)gmail.com wrote: > Without Unicode support, Windows Ports, true Multithreading i think > definietly not. Gimme everything. And free. And now. And without my contribution. Does this work anywhere in your personal life? -PM |