>>165
No one deliberately chooses to be ignorant. They are willfully ignorant because people have answered their questions: why is lisp better? Because for example A B C. But I don't use A or B and I can work around C just fine!
That's fucking insane. A study in cognitive dissonance. I tell you: your entire mode of reasoning is wrong, it's based on a false premise, that people decide that a language is good based on a laundry list of features. Your brain short-circuits: all your miserable life you argued about various laundry lists of features, that's the only thing you know, what's going on? Then you just suppress the entire traumatic experience and go back to talking about Blub retards who don't understand features A, B, and C.
Consider this: someone claims that a spherical car (codename: Cdr) is superior to normal cars. You ask: huh, why is it superior, show me! If Lisp has not yet spread to the rest of your brain from the programming-related areas, what you mean by that is: show me the prototype, how fast does it go, how much fuel does it use, how it is superior. If not then you are beyond logical discussion, goodbye!
If you are still reading: so then that person instead of demonstrating a prototype explains that sphere has the lowest surface-to-volume ratio of all shapes, and also the best structural integrity. Also, spherical cars can easily fit through round holes, and have very good aerodynamic characteristics!
"What the hell," -- you reply, confused, --
"these characteristics are either useless or easily approximated!" "Ha-ha-ha, you are a typical Blub engineer," -- declares the Smug Cdr Weenie. Then she adds something about how regular car designs started using aerodynamic shapes only recently, and damn blubbers praise it as the best thing in the world, instead of going all the way and using Cdr already.
Or, as it happened here, you tell her that she is fucking insane, that a laundry list of features doesn't make a car design useful, that discussing features is pointless, and that the only criterion of usefulness is how actual, real cars built according to the design perform in the real world. She looks at you empty-eyed for a minute, then her brain self-resets and she starts again,
"Damn Blub programmers, one tells them about features A, B, and C, but they just remain wilfully ignorant!"
But fuck it, there's a gazillion non-technical reasons why things fail or succeed and language choice is really, really low on the list.
I commend your doublethink. Next step: to claim that Enterprise Blub programmers are positively selected for incompetence, and that Lisp makes programmers literally hundred times more productive,
in the same post with this assertion. The remark about the "unmaintainable boilerplate" is close, but you need to be more aggressive, to be more explicit about why you argue about Lisp, that it is really important that everyone understands that it's a clearly superior language, which is unpopular because the choice of language doesn't matter.