Why don't people like lisp?

[Ville Vainio]

"Andrew Dalke" <adalke at mindspring.com> writes:

> It's not particularly clever; there's no real need for that.  In
> general, the preference is to be clear and understandable over
> being clever.  (The New Jersey approach, perhaps?)

Some people (academics) are paid for being clever. Others (engineers)
are paid for creating systems that work (in the wide meaning of the
word), in a timeframe that the company/client can afford.

In the for-fun area, by analogy, some people get the kick from
creating systems that work (be it a Linux distribution or a network
programming framework), and some from creating an uber-3133t hacks in
order to impress their friends.

Macros provide billions of different ways to be "clever", so obviously
Lisp gives greater opportunity of billable hours for people who can
bill for clever stuff. I'm studying Grahams "On Lisp" as bad-time
reading ATM, and can also sympathize w/ people who use Lisp just for
the kicks.

Lisp might have a good future ahead of it if it was only competing
againt C++, Java and others. Unfortunately for Lisp, other dynamic
languages exist at the moment, and they yield greater
productivity. Most bosses are more impressed with getting stuff done
fast than getting it done slowly, using gimmicks that would have given
you an A+ if it was a CS research project.

-- 
Ville Vainio   http://www.students.tut.fi/~vainio24