LispCraft

Hi, all. I finally completed Warcraft 2 implementation in LISP.
http://img859.imageshack.us/i/52320836.png/

Took me a few months, though, but mostly because I was too lazy and my DSL is still pretty buggy, has poor debugging support and long compilation times (takes about 30 seconds to reload source file). Anyway, this proves, that writing a game in Lisp is relatively easy, even for a single person.

>>43
dymaic language
Nope. Nope. And more nope. Dynamic languages actually require a lot more unit and regression testing than static languages, to overcome type and identifier name resolution being resolved at runtime, whereas with static languages those types of bugs are caught at compile time and don't need runtime tests.

If you're using dynamic languages, you absolutely at least better have a regression test suite for any non-hobbyist project. Sure, dynamic languages are great for putting together one-off scripts and fire and forget code, but when it comes to maintaining and evolving a code base, dynamic languages can be painful without a proper test suite in place.

This is a well known problem of dynamic languages in the industry, and it seems only that amateurs and hobbyists aren't aware of this inherent problem.

In fact, pretty much any seasoned dynamic typing programmer will consider your code written in a dynamic language to be broken unless it has some automated unit tests.

https://docs.google.com/View?id=dcsvntt2_25wpjvbbhk

http://www.gamedev.net/blog/883/entry-2249305-scripting-languages-are-overrated/

http://codemonkeyism.com/the-unit-testing-lie-aka-dynamic-language-lie/