Lisp's reputation is so bad that many people don't even take a look at Lisp

Re:Lisp's reputation is so bad that many people don't even t... by praptak on Tuesday April 07, 2009 @06:47AM (#550709)

My suggestion for anyone wanting to make Lisp popular: make a Lisp analogue of Mark Pilgrim's "Dive Into Python". Or at least consider whether it is possible to write such a book for Lisp in its current state.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Lisp's reputation is so bad that many people don't even t... by halo on Tuesday April 07, 2009 @07:39AM (#550734)

Isn't that Peter Seibel's "Practical Common Lisp"?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Lisp's reputation is so bad that many people don't even t... by sbt on Tuesday April 07, 2009 @07:53AM (#550742)

Pretty much. PCL is a great book that did much to bring the O'Reilly flavor to the community. Another good contribution is the Common Lisp Cookbook website, that contains snippets for common tasks.

Sadly, this doesn't seem to have struck the heart of the problem (although Lisp-in-a-box that came with PCL seems to have done it for some people).

Think about why Java is so widely used. I would argue that it's because of one thing: portable packages.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Lisp's reputation is so bad that many people don't even t... by access_denied on Tuesday April 07, 2009 @08:35AM (#550781)

The elisp tutorial that comes with Emacs is pretty well written - fluid style, usage of real language features.

[ Parent | on HN ]