Matthias Felleisen
jested "Why are you still using CL when Scrbl/Racket is so much better :-)" ?
My response was as follows:
Dear Matthias,
you are right Racket is so much better in so many dimensions. I use Lisp because I just can't bear programming in a language without proper syntactic abstraction, and that is a dimension where Racket is far
(
Read more... )
Comments 5
Great write up and response. I have been encouraged or rather advised in the past to drop CL and move to Clojure that it is the future of Lisp. I hesistated and like you, with large code base or addiction, its hard to do. I decided to continue adding to my lisp code rather than convert it to another language i will have to learn. Its a risk, but i am willing to risk it if my product is good. I primarily use SBCL and generally okay with it.
Thanks for your great CL tools and libraries. BTW, why can't we rather make the language more modern instead of running away from it.
Jeosol
Reply
Reply
This was a very surprising post for me. You having done so much work for Common Lisp libraries recently, I found the title strange and I concluded it must have some irony in it. But it turned out this was not the case. Obviously this means Racket is a more complete language than I thought it to be.
Selfishly, since I am heavily invested in the language, I hope you will continue working on Common Lisp, because you make its ecosystem better.
Reply
Not true, http://www.red-lang.org/ is beyond, with not only cross-platform but also native GUI, native cross-platform with no intermediate steps compiler, zero dependencies all in 1MB language. Decent I/O, Concurrency few other things are yet to come, it is in active development.
And from my point of view is one of the superior lisps.
Reply
Thank you SO much for ASDF.
Don't betray CL. CL loves you.
Kind Regards,
F.
Reply
Leave a comment