Thinking in Lisp

SQL, Lisp, and Haskell are the only programming languages that I've seen where one spends more time thinking than typing.
That's because it takes forever to think of the solution in Lisp and Haskell as opposed to a decent language. Faggot lispers will spend most of their time figuring out how best to abuse recursion because they think it makes them leet programmers or some shit.

>>13
I can write C faster for certain trivial imperative things, but not for more complex problems, some things that could take me weeks to do in C I can do in days in Lisp. You can think what you want, I don't care, it's a reality for me and it matters not to me if you actually believe me or not - it won't change anything about how I write programs.

>>14
And yet none of those parens have to be typed, you use a structural editor instead. Also your code is broken, CL's defun is not equivalent with Scheme's define. Also both your CL and C implementation is liable to stack overflow, neither is tail-recursive (of course, if you don't want to use tail-recursion, you don't have to, there's countless ways of writing such trivial functions).

>>15
Sometimes imperative makes sense, other times declarative and functional make more sense. Personally, I find declarative and functional work best for complex high-level problems, while imperative works best for low-level problems. I have no problem writing some quick-and-dirty C when it makes sense, then writing some declarative or functional CL. Better use the tool more suited for the job.