Thread 106467029

What went wrong?

Why do you think it went wrong?

>>106467351
Nobody uses it for anything.

>>106467954
What the fuck do you expect? It's a dead language with a spec that can never change because the committee in charge of it actively decided to stop any changes and consider it a finished project.

>>106467986
Finiahed project means perfected and no longer has any flaws.

>>106467986
That sounds so incredibly based I might actually masturbate to the thought.
Holy fuck I'm sick of updating.

>>106467986
Too bad lisp is package manager slop or I'd consider using it for that reason alone.

>>106467029 (OP)
>language of ai
>1980s expert systems were written in Lisp
>1990s fuzzy logic systems were written in Lisp
looks inside
>infix notation is a 3rd party package
>can't do matmul
>can't target the gpu
I wonder why it's not more popular

>>106469202
It was replaced by the better lisp, python.

>>106467986
>I, a retard, know shit about Common Lisp

kek

>>106467954
>Nobody uses it for anything.

Speak for yourself, i have a system running in CL for about 5 years now, working perfectly.

>>106469202
>matmul
>can't do matmul
>can't target the gpu

just install cuda and stop whining

https://github.com/takagi/cl-cuda

>infix notation is a 3rd party package

dude, get a clue, Lisp can be extended in any direction using libraries, that's the beauty of it. Instead of having to wait 5 years until somebody adds feature X to your favorite language's compiler, you just import a library and you get the feature instantly...

not only you get infix notation, you can also work with symbolic algebra easily too.

>>106469372
>It was replaced by the better lisp, python.

Asinine comparison.

Python is a substitute to Common Lisp in the same sense as fucking a blonde rubber inflatable doll is a substitute to a hot sex night with Scarlett Johanson in her prime.

>>106469463
lispfags cope about this, but python really does have all the useful features of lisp. late substitution, garbage collection, etc. the whole homoiconicity thing is basically useless for practical programming. this is the short answer to why lisp's lunch got eaten - it's main selling point for most people was not the parentheses.

>>106469446
Not him, but honestly I'm with with the 80% of Americans mentioned in your study that support national voter id laws.

If you want to vote, get a goddamn ID like every other functional member of society, and if you don't care enough about voting to identify yourself then I literally do not care and it's probably better if those people didn't vote anyways.

Is it undemocratic? Maybe in a purist sense. Is it more secure? Yes. Do I think every member of society should be able to vote? Honestly, no, if you don't contribute positively to society by going to school or working or youve done so already (retired) or you have a get out of responsibility free card for being disabled, then no, I don't really think you have the right to voice your opinion in how government should be ran.

>>106469509
>but python really does have all the useful features of lisp.

let's see, so, python has no:
- native code compilation
- no language standard
- can't change code while the program is running
- can't restart at a specific stack frame
- can't even have multi-line lambdas
- no macros
- no multiple dispatch
- no generic functions
- no metaobject protocol
- can't extend the language by importing a lib

probably more things missing too

>the whole homoiconicity thing is basically useless for practical programming

this is the most retarded thing i've read today, congratulations.

>>106469613
>>let's see, so, python has no:
>- native code compilation
code performance has never been a feature of lisp lol
>- no language standard
remember we're restricting our discussion to *useful* features. also I think it does but whatever
>- can't change code while the program is running
can. I use this all the time
>- can't restart at a specific stack frame
>- can't even have multi-line lambdas
*useful*
>- no macros
lambdas fulfill all the useful functionality of macros
>- no multiple dispatch
there's a decorator for single dispatch in the standard lib. doesn't really make sense for a dynamic lang but w/e
>- no generic functions
isn't this just multiple dispatch?
>- no metaobject protocol
yeah I skimmed the wikipedia page on that. python has metaclasses, dunno what it's missing from a metaobject protocol but I'll tell you I've never missed it
>- can't extend the language by importing a lib
you can. several projects do this. nobody uses them tbf

>>106469613
>can't even have multi-line lambdas
Doesn't matter because def is lexically binding unlike defun >inb4 flet, labels
>no macros
https://peps.python.org/pep-0638/

>>106469807
>lambdas fulfill all the useful functionality of macros
Lmao
>doesn't really make sense for a dynamic lang but w/e
Because structured multimethods with multiple despatch and method combination is the same as a series of ifs on argument types

>>106469509
No point in arguing with lispfags, they are the equivalent of nocoders. They masturbate to useless shit and how it's so cool to write wrappers to do anything useful. The moment you insult their language they have an autistic meltdown and then wonder why no one wants to touch their archaic language

>>106469418
what do you mean "a system"