We used to have a LISP thread more or less constanlty, what happened?

We used to have a LISP thread more or less constanlty, what happened?

Attached: common_lisp.png (2880x1800, 562K)

that thing has dick legs lmao

Sshhh don't let the brainlets know about our secret weapon. While they're programming their 5th bean factory for the day we're manipulating the pure semantic meaning of time and space.

Moved to Lain

Name one cool thing you can do in Lisp that can't be done in C

this

Even SICP calls lisp a failure.

The old "le turning machines mean all programming languages are equal"

>Forgetting programmer productivity

Takes barely any time to implement full OOP by abusing closures in Lisp.

How long and how bug ridden will it be to do in C?

everyone realized lisp was a meme

They have all transcended the material plane.

fpbp /thread

...

reeee no it doesn't

>measuring productivity by doing something a language was not designed with in mind

come on son

Now we have a thread about actual programming instead.

>mfw each leg has a balls

lel

Attached: 1500375365265.jpg (666x632, 61K)

Because Lisp is practically dead?

Lisp (not LISP unless you're referring to a very old version) was deprecated by ML and Haskell. Jow Forums finally caught up with this fact.

We have "functional progamming threads" every now and then.
(yes, Lisp is functional, too)

And I saw a Racket thread just yesterday.
So what's the deal?

If you want popularity, look in the variaous Java/C threads. If you want quality, learn you a Lisp (one game at a time) and get crackin'.

>was deprecated by ML and Haskell

You whish, Typelet.
Haskell can't into homoiconicity.

Homoiconicity is hardly essential. Having a powerful typing system instead of a crappy dynamic typing "system" (which is just a special case of a static typing system, FYI) is.

Lisp as much functional as C++11 - it supports first-class functions and closures, not a big deal in 2018.
>Haskell can't into homoiconicity.
What is template haskell.

>What is template haskell.
Template Haskell is not homoiconic, but it has quasiquotation (which is what is used in Lisp for virtually all macro writing too, instead of homoiconicity).

must hurt to walk
good, homoiconity is a worst practise

Lisp is closer to the original (untyped) LamdaCalculus than any other Programming language. If you think about it, alpha conversion and homoiconicity are closely intertwined.

>implying being close to untyped lambda calculus is a good thing