News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Lisp Machine Manual (1984) by patrickmay on Wednesday September 06, 2017 @03:29PM (#15186434)
Because Brendan Eich's management lied to him about allowing him to do Scheme in the browser: https://brendaneich.com/2008/04/popularity/

When I think of what web programming could have been like, it makes me want to weep.

Re:Lisp Machine Manual (1984) by willismichael on Wednesday September 06, 2017 @04:12PM (#15186740)
I also dream of what it would be like if lisp in the browser had become mainstream, but it's possible that if he had implemented it like he wanted to, it wouldn't have received such wide spread adoption like javascript did.
Re:Lisp Machine Manual (1984) by zeveb on Wednesday September 06, 2017 @05:50PM (#15187400)
> it's possible that if he had implemented it like he wanted to, it wouldn't have received such wide spread adoption like javascript did.

I don't care for Scheme, but I'd be very, very surprised if it'd have failed in such a situation. If a terrible train wreck of a language like JavaScript can succeed, pretty much anything better than INTERCAL can. People wanted to extend browsers; had Scheme been the only way to do that, Scheme is what they'd have used.

Re:Lisp Machine Manual (1984) by patrickmay on Wednesday September 06, 2017 @04:59PM (#15187092)
True. My optimistic/pessimistic daydream is that, as the only game in town for some period of time, it would have introduced enough developers to the language to really give it traction. We'd now be seeing people asking "Why can't I run the same language on the server as in the browser?" It would be the second renaissance!
Re:Lisp Machine Manual (1984) by peatmoss on Wednesday September 06, 2017 @08:01PM (#15188125)
If I had more free time on my hands, or were king of the world and could make it so, a fun exercise would be to retrofit Firefox / Chromium to support Scheme as replacements for HTML/CSS/Javascript and get a merry band of geeks to build a shadow web.