[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: What is a lightweight language
>>>>> "JM" == jmarshall <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
JM> Now I freely admit that the Lisp as it came out of the box was
JM> not up to the task, but it really wasn't that difficult a task
JM> to add the necessary functionality. Once that was in place, we
JM> could perform very complex build steps quite easily.
JM> [End of anecdote]
JM> I've come to the conclusion that Lisp isn't so much a quadruple
JM> amputee as it is an untrained temp worker. It sure doesn't know
JM> squat to start with, but with a little effort you can extend it
JM> to be as powerful as you need.
Your anecdote reinforces Paul's point, I think. If you have a large
project where the effort involved to "add the necessary functionality"
is small relative to the total effort, Lisp can be a win. If you have
a lightweight programming task, adding the "necessary functionality"
will be more expensive than actually writing the application.