Hi Damir,

> On raising popularity... I've taken the task of making default
> contact management app from Picolisp source look modern by taking
> CSS up a notch - and failed miserably.
> Reasons? A) css & html is mingled with code and B) I'm used to
> templates representing HTML, not functions (html within code). I've

Hmm, I see. In fact, I don't see that as a real problem. There are hooks
for CSS in the HTML functions, and there is quite some flexibility in
either passing styles to the functions, or wrapping styles around code

Besides that, it is good to remember that all those HTML functions are
just examples, you may easily modify them or write similar instances.
They are nothing more than "printing" functions, you can directly (prin
..) or (ht:Prin ...) at any time.

> got lost in small functions and failed to see he big picture.

I agree. Sometimes, too much flexibility can cause a nightmare ;-)

> I've gone to far off topic here... To make it popular? Top Rails's
> scaffolding in short video with distributed DB and all that stuff
> and I'm sure people would be interested.

Actually, making PicoLisp popular wasn't my primary intention when
writing the original post. It was about the situation with (the lack of)
libraries, which, as a consequence, reduce popularity (at least
according to Henrik).

As I see it, the problem of acceptance lies on a deeper level:

   - Non-Lisp programmers don't like PicoLisp, _because_ it is Lisp.
     "Too many parentheses", and similar nonsense. Too different for

   - Lisp programmers, on the other hand, don't like it either, because
     it questions everything they were taught (and what they believe)
     during the last 50 years: Compilers, macros, lexical bindings. Too
     different for them.

That's all, I think.

> Ok, rant me over :-)

No reason :-)

- Alex
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe

Reply via email to