Re: What are the domains that lisp doesn't fit int?

fireblade <slobodan.blazeski@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

I just finished reading Anti Patterns Refactoring Software
Architectures,and it hint me that i'm regularly singing gospels to
lisp being a universal hummer for every kind of problem. Once in a
while somebody ask's what is lisp bad for? I basically have only two
ideas:
1.Talking with c++ (Possible but not recommended, due to c++
idiosyncrasy )
2. Erlang/Termite like processes (i wonder how many processes could
scieener support?)

This is wrong. These things are unrelated to lisp. Its actually very
easy to talk in lisp about C++ or Erlang like processes.


Perhaps it would take some time to write a library or a lisp
implementation where it's easy and efficient to communicate with C++
or to create a log of lightweight processes, but this question is
totally unrelated to the lisp language(s).



What are the other domains where lisp doesn't fit in?

Speaking about inexpressible things?


--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/

"What is this talk of "release"? Klingons do not make software
"releases". Our software "escapes" leaving a bloody trail of
designers and quality assurance people in its wake."
.

Relevant Pages