News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Rise and Fall of Lisp at the Jet Propulsion Lab. by gruseom on Monday September 15, 2008 @01:50PM (#304871)
By "inherently individualist" do you mean that Lisp programmers tend not to work in teams? Or just that there aren't many of them, so they tend to be thinly scattered and thus isolated?

My current pet theory is that only a minority of people feel comfortable thinking in s-expressions. For the majority, trees with many levels of nesting aren't a natural medium for expressing their thoughts. (I don't know why this would be, but it's worth pointing out that human language has a very low tolerance for nesting (in fact you almost never see it go beyond level 1)).

I know two very good programmers who gave Lisp a good try and just don't feel comfortable in it. So I don't buy the inferiority argument either. Interestingly, both of those guys strongly prefer Smalltalk, which is arguably as close to Lisp-with-all-those-trees-unwound as anyone has got.

Edit: I'll add that if the nesting theory is correct, I feel lucky to be in the minority that finds it comfortable to build programs that way... what I'm able to do in Lisp far outstrips what I was able to do before.

Re:The Rise and Fall of Lisp at the Jet Propulsion Lab. by BrandonM on Monday September 15, 2008 @05:14PM (#305078)
only a minority of people feel comfortable thinking in s-expressions

I think that everyone coming to Lisp for a period of time experiences this discomfort. It's a completely new way to think. I don't believe, however, that only certain people are capable (with practice) of comfortably programming in S-expressions. I think it just comes down to who is willing to experience the discomfort for the length of time it will take until they have their first "aha!" moment.

For me, I had some minor "aha!" moments while programming in Lisp, but not enough to switch. It was only later, when I wanted more powerful compile-time capabilities in C and when I joined python-ideas and started seeing the plethora of syntax proposals (often followed by lengthy debates which usually led to no changes) before I realized just what makes Lisp a more powerful language.

Re:The Rise and Fall of Lisp at the Jet Propulsion Lab. by silentbicycle on Monday September 15, 2008 @02:14PM (#304897)
I'm trying to figure out what specific characteristics give it the kind of reputation it has.

Good observation about Lisp vs. Smalltalk, by the way. (I also wonder why Smalltalk isn't more popular...)

Re:The Rise and Fall of Lisp at the Jet Propulsion Lab. by gruseom on Monday September 15, 2008 @02:40PM (#304924)
Ok, here I think you need to look at history rather than the languages themselves. Once Lisp (and Smalltalk, for different reasons) became branded as failures, that reputation was fixed in 90+% of people's minds, and it remains so. This is all the more entrenched because of the bias in favor of the newest things in computing. For most people, that a 40-year old failure might be better than something new and popular just isn't possible.
Re:The Rise and Fall of Lisp at the Jet Propulsion Lab. by silentbicycle on Monday September 15, 2008 @02:47PM (#304931)
So, you think it's a legacy of the AI winter?
Re:The Rise and Fall of Lisp at the Jet Propulsion Lab. by gruseom on Monday September 15, 2008 @03:24PM (#304970)
Sure, among other things (like "it's too slow").
Re:The Rise and Fall of Lisp at the Jet Propulsion Lab. by abstractbill on Monday September 15, 2008 @03:58PM (#305009)
That view is remarkably well entrenched. On the last team I worked in, before coming to JTV, we were talking about the big Java project we were working on. I said if I had my way it would have been written in Common Lisp. Many on the team thought that was hilarious. One guy's response was "yeah, maybe if we had a supercomputer!"
Re:The Rise and Fall of Lisp at the Jet Propulsion Lab. by silentbicycle on Monday September 15, 2008 @05:28PM (#305091)
For what its worth, that's probably a pretty good sign that they don't really understand what makes languages slow. (Or that they in "cheap shot" mode.)
Re:The Rise and Fall of Lisp at the Jet Propulsion Lab. by kxt on Tuesday September 16, 2008 @04:41AM (#305578)
Weird, as I was browsing the language shootout, I got the impression that SBCL produces damn fast code, in most cases comparable to the code emited by GCC or Java 6.

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/debian/benchmark.php?test=...

Re:The Rise and Fall of Lisp at the Jet Propulsion Lab. by gruseom on Tuesday September 16, 2008 @11:12AM (#305829)
Yeah, that's the point. It's damn fast now. The "too slow" meme is from decades ago.
Re:The Rise and Fall of Lisp at the Jet Propulsion Lab. by igouy on Thursday September 18, 2008 @12:12AM (#307868)
Notice that you're looking at SBCL 0.9.16

Notice that there are more up-to-date measurements available from the homepage

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/