Because is anyone has used outside the academia inside, Nikita-kun.
Please learn English.
Name:
Anonymous2013-05-31 22:59
If RMS loves Lisp so much...
Why didn't RMS use Lisp to make GNU?
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-01 13:23
One word: Viaweb
lel
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-01 13:26
>>4
RMS isn't a programmer. He is a politician - he organizes C/C++ retards to work for him. But you can't organize Lispers, because Lispers are too smart and independent to work for the FreeSoftware kike.
Because there are no GUI libraries for it that help in making desktop applications. It's just purely mathematical. There was an effort to make a web server using LISP but that effort flopped.
You should also know that Scheme web applications can use continuations to achieve shit that isn't easily possible in other languages, stuff like fine-grained, per-window sessions that also understands the back button, something the WHATWG is meaning to do through a client side standard but has yet to do. If I'm not mistaken, PG wrote HN to take advantage of web continuations, that's why you get "expired" errors if you don't have a fresh list of posts from the front page.
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-02 6:46
>>12 Ruby is better then lisp
Do they not realize how badly it sticks out when they make a fucking dumb mistake?
>>15
Ruby is a denser functional language than LISP
A dense language lets you say things concisely, without obfuscation. You can see more of your program in one glance, and there aren’t as many places for bugs to hide. Beyond a certain point, the only way to make programs denser is to use more powerful abstractions.
How does Ruby stack up against LISP for functional programming? Let’s consider Paul Graham’s canonical example, a function which creates an accumulator:
(defun foo (n) (lambda (i) (incf n i)))
This code is marginally shorter in Ruby, and the notation will be more familiar to C hackers:
>>12 28. Clean Syntax
29. var # variable$var # global variable@var # instance variable@@var # class variableCONST # constantClass # class
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-02 7:51
Does Ruby have anything that approaches the power of CLOS? No? Didn't think so, FOOLS!
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-02 8:37
x = lambda{}
x.call
x[]
It surely looks good, but is it Abelson good?
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-02 9:29
>>17
Aw shit, it's golfing time again? Actually, Lisp's syntax is easier to read and less dense because it presents the syntactic tree in all its direct simplicity.
Because applications != playing around with the command line. Lisp is a toy language. You can't do anything useful with it.
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-02 9:51
>>24
How come a "toy language" like Common Lithp is used in the industry so much? For non-toy things? I guess people are just stupid and don't realize that it's a toy language...
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-02 10:00
Lithp is used in the industry so much
Lel
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-02 10:08
>>26
If you think I'm going to fetch all those links for you, you're mistaken.
>>28
Oooh, the horror! Didn't see any proofs, though. But that's just details.
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-02 10:35
>>23
Anyway, I found that calling foo like foo.2.3 gives an error because 2.3 gets parsed as a floating point number, not as method call. I've to tething the parser.
SYMTA> (symta "| foo N => I => N+I | foo.2.3")
$(fn #1006B5594B)
NIL
SYMTA>
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-02 11:07
Why do most Lispers always exaggerate about the language?
Is it true that if you learn Lisp, your programming style let make shorter programs? How?
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-02 11:15
>>31
No, most lispers try to keep quiet as Lisp is a competitive advantage.
No, it's not true: just learning some language doesn't make you a better programmer. Trying out different approaches that a particular language makes easy — that's another story. And Lisp is a dynamic language which makes it very easy to create syntactic abstractions, so that could be an opportunity to improve your style.
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-02 11:17
>>31 Is it true that if you learn Lisp, your programming style let make shorter programs? How?
You will start using M4 and printf("int main() {... generated code goes here...}")
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-02 11:50
>>32 No, most lispers try to keep quiet as Lisp is a competitive advantage.
Not true though, whenever I read into a discussion about languages and Lisp gets a mention. It starts into either a Lisp flame-war or a circlejerk about how great Lisp is. and why would Lispers keep quiet about it? Trying out different approaches that a particular language makes easy
How do I start out to doing that?
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-02 12:09
>>34
Find a repeated pattern in your code, think about how to create a syntax for automatic generation of that pattern, then if possible write a macro that does it. Then try creating and using macros with macros nested inside. Think about how much of your everyday boilerplate could be abstracted away into macros. Read up on the lishp art of macro-building in e.g. "On Lisp" or "Let Over Lambda".
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-02 12:29
Have you read your LOL today?
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-02 12:36
let eval lambda
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-02 16:26
lel
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-02 16:33
The lel Programming Language - By Eggwing B. Groski
LISP is mental masturbation. A language that doesn't fit the computational model of any physical machine is going to inherently have difficulties in efficient implementation.
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-04 4:48
JAVA is mental masturbation. A language that doesn't fit the computational model of any physical machine is going to inherently have difficulties in efficient implementation.
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-04 5:00
the only two things lisp has against speed is dynamic typing and garbage collection, both of which are mitigated by agressively optimizing compilers. Lisp does lack in security due to the lack of static typing. This can be resolved with assertions, but it takes a clever compiler to keep performance using that method.
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-04 6:58
>>49
Lisp isn't a language, but a way to express languages.
the only two things lisp has against speed is a clever compiler to keep performance?
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-04 8:04
>>51
1. dynamic typing is like C/C++ templates, with only difference being the auto-generation of code for unmatched cases. I.e. if you provide types, all Lisp functions will become templates.
2. Stack is too a form of 1-generation garbage collection. And you can always limit heap size, so collection times will be short.
3. Closures can promptly act as modules, DLLs, OOP classes and compilation units, because everything inside closure should be subject to whole-file-compilation. I.e. think about using closures for DLLs, /usr/bin utilities or filesystem devices.
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-04 8:07
>>53
Compiler shouldnt be clever. It should provide convenient tools for optimization (like type declaration), while CPU can handle stuff like bignums dispatch, while handling fixnums itself.
>>1 Why isn't anyone it used outside the academia?
But they do! Take Reddit, for example: they initially wrote it in Lisp, got funding from Y-combinator and attracted a lot of CS freshmen and sophomores for their seed audience, then rewrote the whole thing in a real programming language.
Interesting to note that it took them one weekend to rewrite the code they spent half a year working on in Lisp. And yet, the language is so good at getting funding from Paul Graham and attracting geek users that even such a drastically reduced productivity is a fair trade-off.
7z's author is likely a Jew too, like most "Russian" programmers (i.e. Ilfak Guilfanov), because ethnic russians aint much fond of education or engineering.
>>55
If lisp is mental masterbation, C and its children are optimization masterbation. Ohh I declared a template here! Oh I used stack allocation here! I'm cumming!
>>58 Can we for a change have a single site, programming language or religion without the Jews?
Well, if goyim were clever and organized enough to develop something of that complexity on their own, they surely would have. It's not like there any Jew would dream of inserting oneself into a doomed goyim-only startup.
But no, as you've noticed, useful software solving complex enough problems developed without enlightened Jewish guidance is rare verging on non-existent. Because goyim are inferior.
By the way, regarding Symta, I would bet that Nikitá "delicate flower" Sadkov is a momser, i.e. his father was a Jew while his whore mom was the usual Slav/Tatar mongrel typically known as "Russian". Thus his self-destructive antisemitism. Also, the amount of Jewish blood in his veins was enough to allow him to develop Symta instead of following the usual Russian path to alcoholism and death, but his upbringing and circumstances guarantee that he will never be able to get endorsement and support from the wider Jewish community, because he wouldn't even realize that he should, and Symta will never progress past its current state. Software development is a social effort.
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-05 6:31
>>71 goyim-only startup.
Never seen such startup. Moreover, where would it get funding? I.e. all oligarchs are Jewish, so goyim-only startup wont get any funding - it have to accept some Jews and beg them for funding.
I've an alternate proposal: nationalize all Jewish capital and put a Nazi party at power, so it will fund all goyim projects.
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-05 6:58
>>72 goyim-only startup. Never seen such startup.
That's the point, silly.
Moreover, where would it get funding? I.e. all oligarchs are Jewish, so goyim-only startup wont get any funding - it have to accept some Jews and beg them for funding.
Nah, your problem is that you're incapable of consistently keeping in mind even a simple idea while you're thinking about related things. In this case, you forgot that Jews are interested in profits first and foremost. In particular that means that any and every Jewish oligarch would happily invest into a prospective startup even if it's all-nigger.
The problem is, of course, that for some inexplicable reason (he he) such startups just don't exist. Maybe it's related in some way to the fact that goyim (and moreso niggers) believe that they should "beg for funding" instead of working hard on a profitable idea.
I've an alternate proposal: nationalize all Jewish capital and put a Nazi party at power, so it will fund all goyim projects.
And then you run out of money. Or do you think "Jewish capital" is some kind of money tree forest that produces money all by itself? I mean, even if it were, I don't know about all goyim, but Russians and Niggers would cut down half the forest and turn the rest into a garbage dump and see it die.
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-05 7:02
>>73 In particular that means that any and every Jewish oligarch would happily invest into a prospective startup even if it's all-nigger.
But then he will be the owner of startup and may order to everyone there to accept Judaism. I.e. it wont be a goyim startup anymore, but a Jewish startup.
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-05 7:05
>>73 Or do you think "Jewish capital" is some kind of money tree forest that produces money all by itself?
See Federal Reserve and money emission policies.
And then you run out of money.
Nazi Germany didn't run out of money. Moreover, Nazis killed order of magnitude more people in WW2, than anyone else.
>>75 Or do you think "Jewish capital" is some kind of money tree forest that produces money all by itself? See Federal Reserve and money emission policies.
Way to miss the point, you are indeed pretty dumb my unfortunate racially-inferior friend! It's like you don't even have the conception of tending and caring for things that feed you, so when I'm saying, look, you have to do that or your trees die, you look at me and are, like, but shit grows on them! See what happens when goyim operate the printing press: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation#Examples_of_hyperinflation
Nazi Germany didn't run out of money. Moreover, Nazis killed order of magnitude more people in WW2, than anyone else.
Ha ha ha, I don't even.
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-05 7:28
Nazis killed order of magnitude more people in WW2, than anyone else. `
>he doesnt know about bolshevik russia
>mfw this shabbos goy worshipping JEWS near me
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-05 7:31
>>76 It's like you don't even have the conception of tending and caring for things that feed you, so when I'm saying, look, you have to do that or your trees die, you look at me and are, like, but shit grows on them! See what happens when goyim operate the printing press: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation#Examples_of_hyperinflation
That is why we have army and control over emission, so no alternate currency would pop-up. And inflation is a normal process, because state have to create target funds, like for army.
Ha ha ha, I don't even.
You dont what? Germany killed more. That is the fact. Therefore Nazi capitalist economy is better, than Jewish ones of Liberals or Commies.
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-05 7:33
>>77 he doesnt know about bolshevik russia
Russia got most casualties in WW2, despite having larger population and resources. Because Nazism is superior.
>>81 I can imagine you playing some FPS and being all about how your K/D or accuracy is better than the winner's and how it's totally not imaginary but very real measures. Loser.
Name:
Anonymous2013-06-05 9:21
>>82
Nope. That is evolution. Social Darwinism. In Jewish-Palestinian conflict Jews killed more Palestinians, than Palestinians killed Jews. Which proves that Zionazism is more efficient than Islam.