its even older than c++ doesn't even have classes that it fakes with that clos thing its all parentesis and its unreadable python reads like pseudocode and you should use that instead
all the other languages have implemented everythign lisp does and better so theres no real need for lisp anymore
inb4 haskell thats toy shit too
Name:
Anonymous2011-05-07 22:16
the same can be said for any programming language, but enough banter have at you
Name:
Anonymous2011-05-07 22:21
>implying C++ doesn't suck over 9000 pingas and LISP isn't my waifu
>mfw
>>10
It'd probably be equivalent, but it also depends on optimization settings used by either the Lisp implementation or the C compiler. I just examined SBCL's generated x86 code for it and can conclude that it should be nearly as fast as the code generated by your average C compiler. The actual bottlenecks could be in the print output function, but that depends on the stream you're outputting to and has more to do with where your standard output goes to than actual implementation performance.
And what, we don't like Python programmers?
Python programmers thrive on carnage, Tiger. They consume, infest, destroy, live off the death and destruction of other species.
You were stung as a child, weren't you?
Imagine a giant cockroach, with unlimited strength, a massive inferiority complex, and a real short temper, is tear-assing around Manhattan Island in a brand-new Edgar suit. That sound like fun?
>>12
>Recently a new abomination has become quite popular, and its name is C++. This monstrosity of a language attempts to extend C in a direction it was never intended, by making structures able to contain functions. The problem is that the structure syntax is not very flexible, so the language is only customizable in this one direction. Hence one is forced to attempt to build all abstractions around the idea of the structure as class. This leads to odd classes which do not represent data structures, but instead represent abstract ways of doing. One of the nice things about C is that the difference between pointer and object is fairly clear, but in C++ this has become incomprehensibly vague, with all sorts of implicit ways to pass by reference.