Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: cyber_surfer@wildcard.demon.co.uk (Cyber Surfer)
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!news.duke.edu!MathWorks.Com!udel!news.sprintlink.net!demon!wildcard.demon.co.uk!cyber_surfer
Subject: Lisp advocacy (Was Re: another take on "C is faster than lisp")
References: <33vlr1$2ud@info-server.bbn.com> <STEVE.94Aug30141513@baloo.gsfc.nasa.gov> <778584011snz@wildcard.demon.co.uk>
Organization: The Wildcard Killer Butterfly Breeding Ground
Reply-To: cyber_surfer@wildcard.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.27
Lines: 91
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 1994 16:25:09 +0000
Message-ID: <778955109snz@wildcard.demon.co.uk>
Sender: usenet@demon.co.uk

In article <STEVE.94Aug30141513@baloo.gsfc.nasa.gov>
           steve@baloo.gsfc.nasa.gov "Steven Rezsutek" writes:

> chyde@labs-n.bbn.com writes:
> 
>    I fail to understand why it is that the implementation language even
>    needs to be mentioned.  we bid, we win, we implement, we support.  would
>    you go over to Computer City and ask what language Microsoft Word is
>    written in?  if they said ALGOL 60, would you buy something else
>    instead? (you'd probably be more amazed that the words ALGOL 60 even
>    came out of their mouth)
> 
> Funny you should mention this.  I recall that when I was doing s/w
> development for a PC oriented company, many of the ads for software in
> the magazines of the time had a loud proclamation of "Written in C!"
> somewhere in them.  _Somebody_ must have though it meant something.
> 
> [We used to use the phrase "Written in C", spoken in a mocking,
> sing-song tone of voice, as the equivalent of "Ooh, ahh. So what?" :-)]

I wonder if a comp.lang.lisp.advocacy (if it existed) would be a
better place for debates like this? I'm just a little tired of adding
threads like this one to my killfile.

Am I the only one? Judging by the lack of replies to my earlier
article, I can either assume that I am alone, or that everyone
else had added that thread to their killfile. So, I'm asking again.

I've noticed many advocacy newsgroups on UseNet, and all for subjects
that I'm sure need them. I know users who love to slag off another
machine, mainly (I assume) because it's one they don't use. I saw
this when micros were still uncommon, and the PET, Apple II, and
TRS-80 were the leading machines.

Not much has changed, only now we argue over software. Back in the
early 80s, some friends and I attempted to settle a debate about
the merits of the PET and TRS-80 machines. We challenged the PET
owner to a game of chess. I don't recall which game the PET owner
used, but the TRS-80 was running Sargon. Both were set to the lowest
earch level. Eventually the two machines (the games) reached a
deadlock", as they began repeating their moves. So, neither "won".

Now, you could argue that the contest was unreastic and arbitrary.
This is true. However, so were all our other arguments. At the
time it seemed like a reasonable way to evaluate the two machines.

What would we use today to eveuate the merits of two programming
languages, such as C and, let's say, Common Lisp? We'd have to
first agree that C, rather then C++ or Objective C, or any other
C relative, should represent the C group of languages. We'd also
have to agree that Common Lisp should represent the "Lisp" family
of languages. Assuming that this could be done, which implementations
of these two languages should be used, and what application might
be used to test them?

I feel sure that this whole debate will look very silly to most
programmers in 10 years time. It certainly bores the pants off me.
Perhaps the only real way to evaluate a language today is to look
at the number of users, or we could compromise and merely could
the revenue generated by application written in it, but that would
ignore the value of the growing amount of freeware.

In any case, I simply don't care. I'll use whatever tools I'm
asked to use, and when I'm free to choose my tools myself, I'll
exercise that freedom without forcing my choices and opinions
on other programmers - unless they ask me for advise. If they
ask for an explanation/justification for my choices, I might
answer, "because I _can_".

If Lisp is "dying" as an industry, I won't mourn it. I can't use
most Lisp systems, as they're prices out of my reach. The freeware
Lisps (and other language systems) will still be there.

When I see a complaint here about Lisp's lack of popularity, I'm
reminded of the comment that Merlin makes in the film Excalibur,
about the time of magicians passing. Larry Niven makes a similar
point in his novel, The Magic Goes Away. I particularly think
of the image he described of aborigines waving bones in the air,
trying invoke magic that no longer exists. It's a sad image, esp
as Niven suggests that it was because of magicians using up mana
(the force behind magic) wastefully, and then not understanding
why it slowly begins to fade.

It's a sade image, but that's how I see it. You can see it
differently, if you like. I won't argue with you. I hope that
I'm wrong, and that the magic will return.

-- 
Future generations are relying on us
It's a world we've made - Incubus	
We're living on a knife edge, looking for the ground -- Hawkwind
