It seems better than bloated c. Where did we go wrong?
Redpill me on lisp
Lisp = Autism, the programming language
It's slow and ugly but autists like it because of various memes
lisp is not a replacement for c, but it turns out that in addition to c and c++ we also need some kind of scripting langauge to write our memescripts in. C alone isn't a good enough scripting langauge.
lisp is the most namaste and redbulled scripting language thus is perfect to go alongside c.
Dis.
Turns out it’s simple to implement and has spawned a plethora of dialects to cater to your specific tastes all based around a simple idea of the first argument being the function name and the remaining things in the parens being args. Cons/Cdr is also a wonderful paradigm for processing lists of things.
No one actuially uses lisp for scripting except rms and his cronies. Javascript, lua, python are languages often used for scripting in real world.
Common Lisp can be almost as fast as C with proper type declarations and optimizations. SBCL has gotten very good.
Besides, languages aren't "fast" or "slow" in themselves. That depends on the implementation.
"Scripting language" is a meaningless term used by autists to discredit what they don't consider "real programming".
And yes, you can build actual software with Lisp, not just mere scripts.
No one takes lisp seriously anymore. It was important for AI about 30 years ago but not taken seriously anymore.
How on earth is C bloated?
If anything is the most debloated language in existence.
I guess I'm just a bit hurt because this made me remember the time people laughed at me, in an interview, because i said C was my favourite language because it was so simple and straightforward.
What did it achieve for AI? All modern NNs are written in python with backends in C.
Lisp is the most powerful programming language.
paulgraham.com
>taking Paul Graham seriously
Turing test ai will be written in lisp change my mind.
Show me on the parentheses where Paul Graham touched you
Yeah and software in the real world sucks ass.
Suprise suprise.
Requires a lot of computations, lisp has fuck all support for running code on GPU; if it happens, it will be done with a language that supports running code on the most cost-efficient computation platform.
It's pretty fucking good.
Still an insignificant amount. I've used plenty of software with scripting capabilities exposed to users and not a single popular one uses lisp as its main scripting language.
Really depends on your problem space
desu I wouldn't provide any system with lisp as a scripting language. Tcl or Lua would be more appropriate. Lisp can be an excellent backend language.
>I wouldn't provide any system with lisp as a scripting language.
welp at least we agree on something
Is there any other language that can change its code without pulling stunts?
Define “change its code” and “without pulling stunts"
As an aside, one of the nice things about lisp is that you can expose it as an extension language, not a scripting language, especially if the system is written in lisp and has a repl running in it. (the core can still be some functions written in C or Java or whatever).
You can compile it and create extra modules with acceptable performance, jack in to the system's repl and examine its internal state, there's much more power in that shit than just scripting.
A programm that changes itself and the way it works without establishing weird RAM constructions or various files
You've drunk too much cool aid.
Should I learn Lisp if I hate Jews?
Fuck you! It is tasty!
Absolutely.
>code can be inserted during runtime
This seems perfect for AI. Performance is useless when you're restricted to compiling every time you want your little ai to change.
Literally unrelated to what I wrote.
Is that a Lisp machine screenshot? Looks comfy.
It's really sad but in the end it always boils down to "I don't like the syntax" when introducing Lisp to other programmers.
That being said, many of Lisp's ideas were incorporated into almost all of the languages we have nowadays. I still miss the simpler (non-)syntax when using those but honestly it's not that bad most of the time.
It's mostly good becasue of improvements in hardware, which is pretty much falling apart.
Dynamic typing was a mistake
>writes 10x more code using meme inheritance hierarchies, duplicates code either manually or automatically, fucks it all up anyway using casts, has to pattern match, all to work around the limitations of static typing
(You) were a mistake
just use global type inference lmao
It's beautiful.
Reminder Lisp failed literally because it was a horribly inefficient language.
BASED
There is no such thing as an "efficient" or "inefficient" language. It all boils down to the implementation.
Reminder that we are stuck with x86 thanks to C.
>tfw we had more advanced operating systems in the 70s than we have now in 2019
Thanks, Bell Labs.
Implementation is governed by semantics.
I still don’t understand exactly what you mean by this
Lisp programs are just Lisp expressions.
(define some-numbers '(1 2 3))
(define a-program (cons '+ some-numbers))
a-program
=> (+ 1 2 3)
(eval a-program)
=> 6
Beside that, Lisps give you access to all the symbol tables so you can hotswap code dynamically if you want to.
Haskell is more terse than Lisp, yet it has a Turing complete type system.
Hmm... Really makes you think
>typing is about terseness or verbosity
>implying all those workarounds have anything to do with verbosity
> redpill
This word is insta-ban, OP.
Nice! You manage to explain lisp and it's benefits in the fewest words I have ever seen. You win one Internet.