No just kidding. I think the main problem with Lisp is nothing to do with Lisp. Rather that Lisp doesn’t need to really change anymore because any problems can be smoothed over by libraries.

I would say that the majority of Lisp development *is* the desktop however. I pulled that one out of my ass.

Common Lisp is not the answer to everything as people would like to consider it. And when the uninformed discovers that he is more than upset that Lisp is not the solution to all his problems as it is advertised to be. No functional language is, actually. Functional languages (and their communities) are specially difficult to deal with because those doing it are not your average Java programmer. Functional language is like OO: it’s great, IF you can do it right.

How people can bash Lisp is beyond me. The argument is “Common Lisp is not PURE as Scheme or Haskell” or “CLOS is not massaging passing”. Do anyone know another language which is 50 years old and STILL matters in an argument? Do anyone know another language which has more practical applications, within the Functional paradigm? Java is barely a decade old and is disintegrating.

Would I prefer Scheme over Common Lisp? Yeah. It’s cleaner, purer, and downright prettier. But Scheme can’t address the problems CL is prepared to. The hype on ‘pure functional languages’. Purity in functional languages is overrated, and you know why? Because NO ONE does it! No one cares all that much about encapsulation and information hiding. Every OO project has some MAJOR crimes against the OO paradigm.

So, back to my point: functional languages only matter to those who can code it. Just like in OO, if you give a beautiful language like Haskell (and ‘pure’) to a lame coder he’ll produce code so ugly you’ll scream to go back to Java. And the industry does not have many coders who can do FP justice. The companies who do not have the staff, or the management intelligence (oh, wait. What IS that?) will be killed by FP.

Paraphrasing Dijkstra: FP is one of the most difficult fields of Programming. The poorer programmers might want to stick with pure OO.

You, on the other hand, appear to be little more than a wannabe (a class with significant “fashion victim” overlap) who hasn’t yet achieved the maturity required to deal properly with criticism. So much easier to come back at everyone who points out that you’re being an idiot with a label and a prejudice, isn’t it? Especially if you have another wannabe like Master Thomson cheering you on.

When you grow up, you might reflect that despite their mutual exclusivity, popularity is no substitute for wisdom.

I notice that you reach for the Troll label rather than reply to what is otherwise a perfectly natural response to your post.

Are you not merely reflecting on ignorance.