Why don't people like lisp?

[Ville Vainio]

Pascal Costanza <costanza at web.de> writes:

> So why is it that Python is continuously evolving as a language? Do
> you think this is going to stop at some stage?

Python is not only the language, it's also the implementation (or
implementations). I don't know whether the evolution is ever going to
stop, you've got to ask Guido :-). Obviously I wouldn't mind if the
language reached Perfection within, say, 10 years, after which it
could be standardized and only the libraries and the implementation
would evolve.

> Wouldn't it be better if everyone could contribute to the evolution of
> a language, and then let the community decide what the best approaches
> are?

Possibly. But personally, I trust the guys in charge. Lisp might the
very essence of programming, built into the DNA of computer science,
but Python is the channeling of that quintessential truth into a form
that is *easily* writeable and esp. readable by mere mortals. It might
lose some of the power, but improved productivity in 90% of the
situations complements this nicely.

> With Python, you have to stick to the constructs the languages give
> you. When you want to add domain-specific abstractions on the language

Yes, and it gives me all I need. You can do a whole lot with
dynamically typed OO and powerful data types.

> > Meanwhile, people are voting with their feet: a lot (thousands? don't

> And as a sidenote, if you are seriously considering to learn and maybe
> use Lisp in practice, you should take a look at _both_ major dialects,
> i.e. Common Lisp and Scheme. They are very different in several

I only use Emacs Lisp. I have Python for the problem domains that CL
and Scheme would cover. I guess I might start hacking CL if/when
XEmacs switched their Lisp implementation, which I believe is in the
roadmaps...

-- 
Ville Vainio   http://www.students.tut.fi/~vainio24