News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by raverbashing on Thursday November 20, 2025 @02:59AM (#45990120)
> "So we could ship a product." This was an alien concept to them.

This mentality seems to have carried over to (most) modern FP stacks

Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by whstl on Thursday November 20, 2025 @03:26AM (#45990272)
Nah, it carried over to scripting languages.

Most of them still require a very specific, very special, very fragile environment to run, and require multiple tools and carefully ran steps just so it does same you can do with a compiled executable linked to the OS.

They weren't made for having libraries, or being packaged to run in multiple machines, or being distributed to customers to run in their own computers. Perhaps JS was the exception but only to the last part.

Sure it works, but a lot of people put a lot of the effort so we can keep shoving square pegs into round roles.

Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by logicprog on Thursday November 20, 2025 @04:11AM (#45990625)
Yeah, anytime I see a useful tool, and then find out it's written in Python, I want to kms — ofc, unless it happens to work with UV, but they don't always
Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by jacquesm on Thursday November 20, 2025 @04:09AM (#45990608)
Don't get me started. I tried to use a very simply python program the other day, to talk to a bluetooth module in a device I'm building. In the end I gave up and wrote the whole thing in another language, but that wasn't before fighting the python package system for a couple of hours thinking the solution is right around the corner, if only I can get rid of one more little conflict. Python is funny that way, it infantilized programming but then required you to become an expert at resolving package manager conflicts.

For a while Conda seemed to have cracked this, but there too I now get unresolvable conflicts. It is really boggling the mind how you could get this so incredibly wrong and still have the kind of adoption that python has.

Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by ErroneousBosh on Thursday November 20, 2025 @04:25AM (#45990747)
Or, you know, it might just be that you're not very good at computers.

Instead of jamming in thing after thing after thing blindly hoping it's going to work, try reading the error messages and making sense of why it's doing what it's doing.

This is such Gen Z behaviour - it doesn't work first time so throw a strop and fling stuff.

Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by jacquesm on Thursday November 20, 2025 @04:27AM (#45990761)
This is such a hilarious comment.

Thank you for making my day.

Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by DonHopkins on Thursday November 20, 2025 @04:41AM (#45990854)
Hey Gen Z, as long as I have you on the line, could you please explain 67 to me?

I've heard of "68 and I'll owe you one", so is 67 about owing you two?

Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by jacquesm on Thursday November 20, 2025 @04:45AM (#45990874)
I'm having a hard time coping with my social media addiction while doing some fairly hardcore development on an STM32 based platform so sorry :)

Incidentally, when will you (multiple) come and visit?

It's been too long.

Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by DonHopkins on Thursday November 20, 2025 @04:48AM (#45990903)
I owe you at least one or two! Maybe we can test your drones out on that Russian guy with the GoFundMe campaign, then I'll owe you three! ;)
Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by ux266478 on Thursday November 20, 2025 @10:18AM (#45993487)
thats a gen alpha thing sorry unc
Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by s0sa on Thursday November 20, 2025 @06:03AM (#45991378)
Oh yeah? Well the jerk store called, and they’re running out of you!
Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by whstl on Friday November 21, 2025 @10:08AM (#46005270)
His wife is in a coma
Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by iLemming on Thursday November 20, 2025 @11:12AM (#45994205)
> you're not very good at computers.

Yup, I guess I am not. Been coding for over 20 years, went through over a dozen different PLs and only Python - the best fucking friend who doesn't sugar coat it, tells you without stuttering - "you suck at this, buddy"

     # PEP 9001: Constructive Computing Feedback

     ## Abstract

     This PEP proposes a standardized error message for situations where Python interpreters shall inform the user of insufficient computational competence.

     ## Specification

     When a user attempts to execute Python code that supposedly should work but it doesn't, the interpreter shall emit:

         You're suck at computers
Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by ErroneousBosh on Thursday November 20, 2025 @02:31PM (#45996632)
> Yup, I guess I am not. Been coding for over 20 years

Wow, nearly as long ago as my first kernel module.

Then you ought to be able to figure out how to install one thing then, eh?

Just out of interest, what was it that was causing such a hassle? I expect it's not really relevant now, but it would be interesting to see how hard it would be to fix.

Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by iLemming on Thursday November 20, 2025 @02:40PM (#45996739)
It's not hard. It's just annoying to deal with this shit on constant basis. Like just the other day, the tests wouldn't pass locally, while they're passing on CI. I was scratching my head for sometime, turns out there was breaking change in csv.QUOTE_STRINGS or something, between 3.12 and 3.13 of Python. How the fuck did they manage to fix/improve fucking csv logic introducing a breaking change?
Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by whstl on Friday November 21, 2025 @10:06AM (#46005253)
I'm always suspicious of people who go "this is easy" as a way to put others down.

...especially when it's about problems that are universally accepted as not being trivial, and often require entire teams and ecosystems (Docker, Poetry, uv) to solve in scale.

Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by foobarian on Thursday November 20, 2025 @08:51AM (#45992526)
You and me both. These days I don't even try, just docker pull python and docker run -v .:/app python /app/foo.py
Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by arethuza on Thursday November 20, 2025 @09:26AM (#45992891)
I thought that was just me - I really rather liked Python the language but was completely confused at how the package system seemed to work.... Mind you this was 12 years ago or so but it was enough to put me off using it ever again.
Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by iLemming on Thursday November 20, 2025 @11:04AM (#45994085)
Yeah, it's still shitty. So often I have to go through some weird hoops to even just run the tests for a project with commits made last week. I can't even ask Claude to explain something about any given repo, it naively tries to run them tests, only to hit the wall. The number of different linters and checkers we have to run on CI just to make sure things are in good state, yet every time I clone something and try to get it running, almost always some kind of bullcrap. Why the fuck we even keep trying to write things in Python, I just don't get it.
Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by eternityforest on Friday November 21, 2025 @03:00AM (#46002248)
I don't generally see this kind of issue with UV, at least not with the ultra popular libraries.

With the exception of Gstreamer. I use some awful hacks to break out of virtual environments and use the system Gstreamer, because it's not on PyPi....

Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by raverbashing on Thursday November 20, 2025 @03:42AM (#45990405)
You are correct unfortunately
Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by graemep on Thursday November 20, 2025 @07:49AM (#45992044)
TCL has good solutions for this, but its not made it a success.

Where I see Python used is in places where you do not need it packaged as executables:

1. Linux - where the package manager solves the problem. I use multiple GUI apps written in python

2. On servers - e.g. Django web apps, where the the environment is set up per application

3. Code written for specific environments - even for specific hardware

4. One off installs - again, you have a specified target environment.

In none of the above cases do I find the environment to be fragile. On the other hand, if you are trying to distribute a Windows app to a large number of users I would expect it to be problematic.

Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by whstl on Thursday November 20, 2025 @08:33AM (#45992375)
You don't find the environment to be fragile because millions of human hours have been spent fixing those problems or working around them.

Which is significantly more than was needed for different technologies to achieve similar results.

Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by mr_toad on Thursday November 20, 2025 @09:09AM (#45992717)
But people start by hacking away with one-off installs written for their specific environments, get it to the point where it’s useful to others, and then expect others to install all the tools and dependencies needed to install it.

Quick start guide: works on my machine.

Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by throwaway81523 on Friday November 21, 2025 @12:36AM (#46001557)
It seems the other way to me, maintaining environment consistency is such a pain that even a 5 line Python script ends up getting packaged in its own Docker container.
Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by rmunn on Thursday November 20, 2025 @03:35AM (#45990353)
Not the ones I've used. Haskell compiles to executables, F# compiles to the same bytecode that C# does and can be shipped the same way (including compiling to executables if you need to deploy to environments where you don't expect the .NET runtime to be already set up), Clojure compiles to .jar files and deploys just like other Java code, and so on.

I'll grant that there are plenty of languages that seemed designed for research and playing around with cool concepts rather than for shipping code, but the FP languages that I see getting the most buzz are all ones that can ship working code to users, so the end users can just run a standard .exe without needing to know how to set up a runtime.

Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by raverbashing on Thursday November 20, 2025 @03:44AM (#45990418)
True but some still wants me to understand what a monofunctor is or something that sounds like a disease to do things like print to screen or get a random number

I feel that is the biggest barrier to their adoption nowadays (and also silly things like requiring ;; at the end of the line)

Pure functions are a good theoretical exercise but they can't exist in practice.

Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by jacquesm on Thursday November 20, 2025 @04:11AM (#45990623)
> Pure functions are a good theoretical exercise but they can't exist in practice.

Well, they can. But not all the way up to the top level of your program. But the longer you can hold off from your functions having side effects the more predictable and stable your codebase will be, with as an added benefit fewer bugs and less chance of runtime issues.

Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by DonHopkins on Thursday November 20, 2025 @05:01AM (#45990990)
Yes, but they're "Hello world!" hostile, so traditional programming language pedagogy doesn't work well.

Q: How many Prolog programmers does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: Yes.

Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by mchaver on Thursday November 20, 2025 @05:52AM (#45991325)
I imagine LLMs have already thrown traditional programming language pedagogy out the window.
Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by raverbashing on Thursday November 20, 2025 @06:18AM (#45991469)
Yes I agree, pure functions are good building blocks (for the most part), but I don't think the current abstractions and ways of bridging the FP and Procedural world are good enough

Also have you managed to eliminate the side effect of your IP register changing when your program is running? ;)

Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by dreamcompiler on Thursday November 20, 2025 @09:10AM (#45992727)
I love FP but at the end of the day registers are global variables. Half of modern compiler theory consists of workarounds for this sad truth.
Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by lucas_membrane on Thursday November 20, 2025 @03:09PM (#45997038)
A functional program is an a self-contained expression -- an isolated system following its own rules. The foremost example we have of such a thing is the universe itself, but the universe is not a good example in this discussion, because we have plenty of reasons to think that the universe contains pure (not pseudo-) randomness. Beyond that, isolation , when it matters, is not an easily proven proposition, and is a deplorable fantasy when assumed in many of the other science and engineering disciplines.
Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by mr_toad on Thursday November 20, 2025 @09:12AM (#45992751)
> but I don't think the current abstractions and ways of bridging the FP and Procedural world are good enough

I find that both Python and Javascript allow you to use functional code when appropriate, without forcing you to use it when it isn’t.

Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by roryc89 on Thursday November 20, 2025 @04:22AM (#45990716)
In most FP languages it is simple to print to screen and get a random number.

Pure functions often exist in practice and are useful for preventing many bugs. Sure, they may not be suitable for some situations but they can prevent a lot of foot guns.

Here's a Haskell example with all of the above:

  import System.Random (randomRIO)

  main :: IO ()
  main = do
    num <- randomRIO (1, 100)
    print $ pureFunction num

  pureFunction :: Int -> Int
  pureFunction x = x * x + 2 * x + 1
Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by dbtc on Thursday November 20, 2025 @04:18AM (#45990682)
Wouldn't the whole system be the product then? There's tradeoffs, but that's just integration.
Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by iLemming on Thursday November 20, 2025 @10:08AM (#45993346)
There's 'FP stacks' and "FP stacks" and some aren't expressly similar. Volumes of money/data get handled by FP stacks - Jane Street famously uses OCaml; Cisco runs their entire cybersec backend on Clojure; Nubank covers entire Latin America and about to spread into the US - runs on Clojure on Elixir; Apple has their payment system, Walmart their billing, Netlfix their analytics on Clojure; Funding Circle in Europe and Splash in the US; etc. etc. There are tons of actual working products built on FP stacks. Just because your object-oriented brain can't pattern match the reality, it doesn't mean it's not happening.
Re:The lost cause of the Lisp machines by vrighter on Friday November 21, 2025 @04:15AM (#46002722)
python comes to mind here. I have almost never had a deployment go smoothly.