This article claims that Lisp and SmallTalk developers are 10x more productive than developers using mainstream languages, but only in small teams. In other words, these languages don't scale. http://evrl.com/programming/2019/03/28/the-language-conundrum.html …
-
Show this thread
-
-
Replying to @stefan_arrr @djsmith42
When Google tried to translate part of the Lisp code base to C++ the result was something like 10x the size for marginal gains in speed, with similar amount of lines per programmer day... so yes on the "10x more productive" front.
2 replies 10 retweets 18 likes -
I'll continue with my computing persona
@ngnghm. My conclusion about the ultimate failure of the ITA Reservation System: it was mainly a management failure to follow any but the first principle I laid in this article:https://fare.livejournal.com/171998.html1 reply 3 retweets 8 likes -
But I can see a relationship to Lisp: being superproductive, conservative, high entry barrier, and unpopular, Lisp attracts lone wolves—so our experienced staff therefore had no social structure to fight or survive bad management.
1 reply 2 retweets 3 likes
I don't mean that Lisp was perfect. That's why I spent much time working on tools to improve Lisp modularity: build systems (ASDF, XCVB, Bazelisp), types (asdf-finalizers, quake types), parametric polymorphism (lisp-interface-library), etc. But that was no blocker—as I proved.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
Read my blog!