[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: C# is not Dylan (was: Re: C# : The new language from M$)
> From: cbbrowne@news.isp.giganews.com (Christopher Browne)
> Subject: Re: C# is not Dylan (was: Re: C# : The new language from M$)
>
> Ah, but when you're trying to sell _Dylan_, when it has _no_ market,
> having a community of Lisp adopters might have been a Good Thing, and
> might well have represented a lot more than 1% of the market _for
> Dylan_.
Attempting to cannibalize a small and entrenched user base is never a good
idea.
If Dylan was a language that looked and acted exactly like Lisp, I can't
help but feel there's an already established language that people would use
instead.
Languages can come from no market to global domination *if* they
differentiate themselves. J**a, Perl and (for the moment) Rebol and PHP
prove this. "Dylan is almost as good as Lisp but doesn't have it's 'purity
of syntax' " is not going to convince anyone.
Reading some of the Fun-O white papers will give a feel for what makes Dylan
special. Bemoaning its lack of information-destroying syntax won't.
- Rob.
References: