News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Employee #1: Amazon by skaphan on Tuesday September 06, 2016 @04:58PM (#12439249)
EB and I both worked at Lucid, which produced a Common Lisp system, not to my knowledge a version of Emacs (though maybe so after I left in 1989?). Some other early employees knew and liked Lisp, but we didn't use it on any core functionality. The text substitution logic you mention, that I wrote, was really simple and not particularly Lisp-like. Though again, after I handed it off, who knows what happened.
Re:Employee #1: Amazon by nocarrier on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @03:05PM (#12446134)
Lucid Emacs -> Xemacs was mentioned in a sibling comment, but I remember people being in awe about EB working on those. There were many interesting employees back then--J. Chenault, J. Gehlen, R. Braumeller, F. Eiden, K. Sears, etc. I've lost touch with most of them but I learned a lot from them.

I started in October 1997 and did Perl work on backend systems, but I had a few friends who worked on the frontend. They used to talk about how Catsubst had a very small set of verbs and that everything was a function, even arithmetic, and that prefix notation was used for all macro calls. They thought it was Lisp-inspired, but they were also pretty junior programmers too. I never worked with Catsubst myself, so my information is second-hand, while yours is zero-hand since you wrote it. :-)

Thanks for all the work you did on Amazon's infra!

Re:Employee #1: Amazon by boulos on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @12:43AM (#12441014)
My understanding from others (second hand) is that there was lots of Perl. (And that this persisted for quite some time). True?
Re:Employee #1: Amazon by skaphan on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @07:36AM (#12442431)
Yes, there was a ton of Perl in the early days. This came about because Paul Davis was a Perl aficionado and did a lot of script writing with it early on, and the non-programmers, of which there were n-2, could pick it up much more easily than C (of course). Which is how some of them became programmers. Incidentally, we used C, not C++, though I liked OOP, because I had previously had less than great experience using C++ on large projects. We used a C++ compiler though because it could catch more errors than the C compiler could. This is one area where Steve Yegge was a bit off in that famous post.
Re:Employee #1: Amazon by philodespotos on Tuesday September 06, 2016 @05:28PM (#12439416)
Lucid Emacs is now XEmacs. Work would've begun right around 1989, so it's likely you just never crossed paths with it. =)
Re:Employee #1: Amazon by skaphan on Tuesday September 06, 2016 @07:46PM (#12440068)
After leaving Lucid I was really not paying much attention to what they were doing. It wasn't long before things started going badly there and they were out of business a few years later. But indeed, I had forgotten what little of the Emacs history I might have known. Here it is: https://www.jwz.org/doc/lemacs.html
Re:Employee #1: Amazon by bluedino on Tuesday September 06, 2016 @06:51PM (#12439835)
Didn't jzw work at Lucid as well? I'd love to see a list of famous programmers that works there.
Re:Employee #1: Amazon by skaphan on Tuesday September 06, 2016 @07:32PM (#12440008)
If you are referring to Jamie Zawinski (jwz), yes, but after my time there.