Re:Lisp: it's not about macros, it's about READ (2012)
by coldtea on Monday July 18, 2016 @06:24AM
(#12114191)
It was never about the features -- it's about their integration. The fact that you can get get 20 ad-hoc features piled on a language doesn't mean they come as naturally as they do in LISP.
And "AST parsing and manipulation", "macros" and "homoiconicity" are very far from being "normal features of any modern language", except if by modern you mean "any language that has them". Most languages currently in vogue (by which I mean extensive commercial/IT use and made in the past 10-20 years, not COBOL or C++) don't have those.
>Lisp STILL has the same problem on small processors.
So? We have languages at all levels of the CPU-power spectrum, plus we use Javascript and Java and Python in small processors all the time, and Lisp is either very near (e.g. to Java) in speed or flies all over them.
Except if you mean really restricted embedded processors, but then again, nobody said LISP is the best option for them.
And "AST parsing and manipulation", "macros" and "homoiconicity" are very far from being "normal features of any modern language", except if by modern you mean "any language that has them". Most languages currently in vogue (by which I mean extensive commercial/IT use and made in the past 10-20 years, not COBOL or C++) don't have those.
>Lisp STILL has the same problem on small processors.
So? We have languages at all levels of the CPU-power spectrum, plus we use Javascript and Java and Python in small processors all the time, and Lisp is either very near (e.g. to Java) in speed or flies all over them.
Except if you mean really restricted embedded processors, but then again, nobody said LISP is the best option for them.