From: Jeremy Tregunna <jtregunna@...>
Date: 2006-06-08T13:51:16+09:00
Subject: Re: I love Ruby - But how bright is Ruby's Future?

--Apple-Mail-7--363629014
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=US-ASCII;
	delsp=yes;
	format=flowed


On 8-Jun-06, at 12:33 AM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

> Matthew Smillie wrote:
>> For big values of long - your guess is likely as good as mine, but  
>> I'd
>> pick Lisp.  Four decades and still going strong.
> Actually, Lispnik Paul Graham is "redesigning" Lisp to last 100 years
> (from now). Do a search for "Paul Graham" and "ARC" to see what he's
> proposing. It hasn't moved a lot recently; perhaps he's leaning  
> towards
> jumping on the Ruby bandwagon. :)

Not to hijack the thread, but make a casual comment regarding Arc.  
Paul Graham has done a lot for the Lisp community, however, he's  
basically gone in and said "look how great lisp is" while in the same  
breath stating, "but wait, ignore it, I'm redesigning it making it  
better, but I don't have anything yet, stay tuned". Which essentially  
killed a lot of the forward momentum and acceptance of lisp. He's not  
exactly someone I'd point to if I were trying to make the point  
you're trying to make.

--
Jeremy Tregunna
jtregunna@blurgle.ca


"One serious obstacle to the adoption of good programming languages  
is the notion that everything has to be sacrificed for speed. In  
computer languages as in life, speed kills." -- Mike Vanier


--Apple-Mail-7--363629014--