>>151
They do understand them now, when they are in Visual Basic. [...] programmer's IQ jumped up forty points since then (and then you'll have to explain why Lisp still isn't popular).
Visual Basic has a lot of stuff, it always had lots of stuff, that doesn't mean anybody is using it. It will also be avoided because the language has persisted for decades without it, all the blogspam tutorials won't cover it because they just in for the Adsense monies, and books just want you "proficient" in X hours, etc. Also, whenever anything is added to Visual Basic its because it is also in C#, VB.NET is just C# without braces, and things are added to C# to band-aid over limitations of the primary paradigm, those languages can do without the lambda, whereas lambda are central to the actual functioning of all functional languages. OTOH for Lisp's
actual killer feature (protip: it is not lambda) does VB.NET have macros?
Which was that if Lisp really boosts productivity that much and is used by good programmers, then programs written in Lisp should dominate FOSS at least.
I don't know about others, but by the time I've been writing in Racket I just don't care about releasing anything, I do use it to analyze stuff like patterns in Wikipedia's dumps. Conversely, you'll find metric tons of stuff (mainly games) written in noob friendly languages because these people just want an EXE out, and have motivation to impress or some other similar desire.