Is lisp still taught in undergrad CS programs? I heard that at Berkeley,
they switched the first CS class from using lisp to java. Maybe the reason
viaweb was so fast in execution had nothing to do with being done in Lisp,
but rather it might have been because all the people who knew lisp well
enough also happened to be stellar programmers from MIT.
The problem with using lisp is that regardless of whether it is a "superior
language", it's not efficient to use unless you can hire enough people to
program in it, and that supply is surely limited.
james
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Bone" <jbone@jump.net>
To: "Lisa Dusseault" <lisa@xythos.com>
Cc: <fork@xent.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2001 4:03 PM
Subject: Re: Lisp, the secret weapon.
>
>
> Lisa Dusseault wrote:
>
> > Lisp may make better programmers, but that doesn't necessarily mean it
makes
> > better programs.
> >
> > To take an example from Shaolin Wooden Man (I love martial arts movies,
> > particularly Jackie Chan), you can become a better fighter by walking
around
> > in lead shoes & carrying water up stairs in buckets with holes that make
you
> > run to get to the top before all the water runs out. But when the
training
> > ends, you lose those restraints and take the best tools you have, and
the
> > strength or technique you've built up is there for you.
>
> I think this analogy is very broken. Lisp doesn't make better programmers
by
> artificially handicapping them and forcing them to work around / through
these
> handicaps; rather, just the opposite. It provides an extremely cogent
and
> high-level language environment for doing programming in the most abstract
sense
> possible. It teaches programmers to think abstractly about problems and
the
> task of programming itself.
>
> When I think about algorithms, I tend to think in something like Scheme
with
> some more overt ZF / ZFC set theory thrown in. I really believe Lisp /
Scheme
> is the best tool out there for algorithm design, and certainly the best
for
> general metaprogramming tasks. Unf., it's *never* the best choice for a
> commercial endeavor, for entirely nontechnical reasons. James' Ariba
comment is
> sadly par for the course... I've been involved in three projects where
the
> initial work was done in a Lisp but which were forced to migrate to C/C++
for
> business reasons. Seen many, many others. The general attitude among
> technology marketers, investors, and so on seems to be that if you're
writing in
> a Lisp, you're doing a "science fair project" rather than building a
business.
>
> jb
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 29 2001 - 20:26:19 PDT