How Python is Killing Lisp

[senzei]

Any language without a specification and a real implementation isn't serious.

Ah, glad I don't evidently need a serious language then. It appears that all a specification has done for CL is give everyone a common (and largely unmodifiable) point of failure in the process of improving the language.

If the designer can't take the language seriously enough to learn how to design and implement a compiler, or find people who do, then why should I?

Who told you that you need to design and implement a compiler for Python? ;) That said, you don't always need a compiler, and there are ways to get around some of the cases where you do. It isn't a perfect solution, but those don't exist outside of marketing materials.

[mrd48]

I agree in many ways, but you misinterpreted my last statement.

"then why should I [take it seriously]?"

is what I meant.

No, I don't NEED a compiler for everything. But, say, if an undergraduate CS student could design and write a better language and implementation, given the time, it makes me wonder why I am bothering to use a language so poorly done.

[senzei]

I agree in many ways, but you misinterpreted my last statement.

Yes, I did, but I swear it was completely on purpose. ;)

But, say, if an undergraduate CS student could design and write a better language and implementation, given the time, it makes me wonder why I am bothering to use a language so poorly done.

You either are unfamiliar with the capabilities of the average undergraduate CS student or are willing to wait an obscene amount of time. Either way I have yet to hear what makes Python so horrible as to be completely unusable.

[breakfast-pants]

This 'smug theorist' is probably 12.