Steven E. Harris wrote:
Plus, Lisp loses on size of community and size of standard
libraries.
True, but if you're just trying to find some excuse why a given
language isn't worth learning, that should be just as possible with
any language you choose to shoot down. Every language can "lose" for
some reason, yet people use them all to great effect.
Yes and no. Programming today consists mostly of plugging API's
together with some glue code. A language in which that is difficult is
a *big* lose rather than a small lose. Foreign function interface
incompatibilities are a big headache.
The other problem is that modern programming also consists of passing
your work on to the next person. A lack of standard libraries makes
that communication more difficult since now I have to learn your program
*and* the magic libraries you used. I *really* hate the fact that 90+%
of all Lisp/Scheme libraries lack both coherent naming conventions and
regression tests.
As I have said before, I no longer use libraries without regression
suites. Period.
If someone forces me to, that library gets added into my schedules as
though I had to take complete ownership of the code.
-a
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
