Re: Decreasing the "standard deviation" of lisp

Rainer Joswig wrote:
In article <1146200929.128239.294360@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"Ben Prew" <ben.prew@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Why should that be the case? Why should Common Lisp suddenly
be the target for script kiddies, instead of developers?

Are you saying that the entire concept of language "standard deviation"
is flawed, or just that it needs some refining?

I don't remember mentioning anything about "script-kiddies", and I
would argue that most of the mainstream languages availabe now are the
target for developers. I would also argue that there are some
amazingly intelligent programmers using Ruby, Perl and Java. Why not
make it easier for them to learn lisp as well?

I'm not looking to hamstring's lisp power, just looking for ways to
make it more "digestable" to incoming programmers who may have
experience it at least one, if not two or three of the mainstream
languages. Why not make it easier for them to be immediately
productive?

Lisp is an incredibly beautiful language, and I much prefer it to most
of the mainsteam languages now (I use Perl professionally), so why not
extend an invitation to, experience the beauty, to other programmers?


Also, since I happen to think that lisp's concepts (macros) are some of

Actually I don't think macros are that great. They are mostly
oversold and other more useful concepts are overlooked.

What other concepts do you feel are getting overlooked? I chose macros
as an example, because from my (limited) experience and from the lisp
people I've talked to, they mention macros as one of the few things
that really can't be done in other languages?

I am certainly willing to accept that there are additional useful
concepts that lisp provides, but if you can't get more people to use
the language, then it doesn't really benefit them.


I think that we (the lisp community) should imitate some functions of
the more popular languages to increase membership. As an example, I was
thinking it would be fairly easy to add things like "while", "for",
"foreach", "var", etc.

Unfortunately nothing will happens from a Usenet post.
Everything begins with working source code.

I had sample code :P

Seriously though, at this point, I'm feeling out what the community
wants to do. I can write all the code I want, but as Pascal said, if
the community doesn't approve of it, it doesn't get added.

And, I'll be honest, I don't see myself as having a lot of vision, so I
can work on what I see, but I also know that sometimes a good idea from
one person can spark great ideas in others.


--
http://lispm.dyndns.org/

--
Ben

.

Relevant Pages

  • When static typing is worth it
    ... typed languages like Lisp. ... developed more quickly in modern statically typed languages than ... static type system and remove run-time checks. ... incurs a run-time error if the list is ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: What is Lisp used for?
    ... My main languages are Perl, Java, and ColdFusion. ... Lisp PHP FlamingThunder). ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: SBCL is now faster than Java, as fast as Ocaml, and getting better
    ... what MLish languages do in this case. ... If you are trying to compare my OCaml code with your Lisp translation then ... Lispers not only fail to understand the benefits of pattern matching ... but it is a Java extension just much as Clojure ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: LISPPA
    ... > memory resources. ... do in Common Lisp with code that runs about as fast. ... >> comparing Lisp with languages like C, Pascal and Basic, ... If by "visual programming" you mean the sort of ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Decreasing the "standard deviation" of lisp
    ... Why should Common Lisp suddenly ... be the target for script kiddies, instead of developers? ... What other languages and libraries are popular? ... Perl and Java. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)