Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!ratty.wolfe.net!big.aa.net!cat.bbsr.edu!not-for-mail
From: <bhunter@cat.bbsr.edu> (Bill Hunter)
Subject: Re: Why is Lisp inactive compared to Perl et al?
Message-ID: <5117cb$122c1.33f@cat.bbsr.edu>
Date: Wed, 17 May 1995 21:44:26 GMT
Reply-To: <bhunter@cat.bbsr.edu>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.46
References: (none) <3o37bv$o7l@info-server.bbn.com>
Organization: Hamilton Services
Lines: 21

Clint Hyde <chyde@bbn.com> wrote:

>sure it is. it's called C. it's just like "buying IBM": no one ever lost
>their job for writing something in C. 

I don't quite agree - the limitations of C seem to have pushed people
into flirting with C++ at most places.  Without devolving into a
general discussion of C++ , my take is that the language is Just Not
Simple Enough, and that after a few major corporate software
development projects go off the rails, managers will be looking for
alternatives.  There are several candidates.  The strongest one is
probably Smalltalk.  If Smalltalk is a contender, why not Lisp?

Actually (shudder) the strongest candidate at the moment is probably
Visual Basic...







