>>10
Because everybody who claims to support Lisp is just a troll.
Think about it; it's a 50 year old language that has NEVER in all its time achieved popularity except with a handful of very loud autists.
How useful could it possibly be?
Most CL and Scheme implementations have Windows ports and they work fine. SBCL (CL), ClozureCL, CLISP, ECL, Allegro CL (non-free), LispWorks(non-free), Racket (Scheme), MIT Scheme, and many others work fine on Windows. See http://common-lisp.net/~dlw/LispSurvey.html or http://www.cliki.net/Common%20Lisp%20implementation . Some implementations may have some *nix-specific parts which won't work on Windows, but they are usually extensions (such as POSIX support for example).
I also forgot to mention that most of the implementations mentioned are not interpreted, but compile to native code, so if for whatever reason you're looking for slow interpreted versions, you may find that some of them come with interpreters too, but it's more of an exception, not the norm.
Name:
Anonymous2010-12-23 6:57
OP here.
What do you have against Lisp? It is one of the most beautiful languages out there from a theoretical point of view!
Prolog > Lisp.
Lisp is for those people who love to act as if they know everything but actually know very little and are constantly making a fool of themselves by doing such.
>>19
It's useless. You can write beautiful DSL in it, but when you try to write something useful, it spank your anus harder than nigger with black dildo.
Name:
Anonymous2010-12-23 15:44
>>24
Looks like somebody tried to program in Lisp but got bitten by the fact that they can't program to begin with.