I finally understand why I'm not allowed to use Lisp • Hacker News Board

The same can be said for any statically typed language. Any language that binds types as late as possible is infinitely more enjoyable to work with than one that fixes types at compile time. Short of developing missile guidance systems I don't think static types are warranted for anything.

Re: I finally understand why I'm not allowed to use Lisp

#14

Post by berntb » Sun, Feb 20, 2011, 1:16 AM UTC

nyellin wrote: post #4

acangiano wrote: post #2

> I work in C# (worst language EVER!) You lose all credibility right there. C# is far from the worst language ever, and a pretty decent one among mainstream object oriented languages.

Agreed. I would choose Python over C# for my own projects any day. However, I can't comprehend the senseless hatred that people have for C#. It is a nicer language than Java (imo) and it has very good performance. Furthermore, due to Mono, C# is no longer a closed platform.

Re Mono:

Microsoft is not suing Google for patents on operating systems but instead pressures the handset manufacturers using Android.

Is there a guarantee that a customer can use Mono for commercial applications, without a shake down from Microsoft?

Re: I finally understand why I'm not allowed to use Lisp

#15

Post by DougBTX » Sun, Feb 20, 2011, 1:27 AM UTC

I was going to tell him off for missing Enumerable.Aggregate, but then I noticed that he posted 6 months before that was included in the standard libraries, so I'm going to have to let him off.

Re: I finally understand why I'm not allowed to use Lisp

#16

Post by nyellin » Sun, Feb 20, 2011, 1:29 AM UTC

berntb wrote: post #14

nyellin wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. I would choose Python over C# for my own projects any day. However, I can't comprehend the senseless hatred that people have for C#. It is a nicer language than Java (imo) and it has very good performance. Furthermore, due to Mono, C# is no longer a closed platform.

Re Mono: Microsoft is not suing Google for patents on operating systems but instead pressures the handset manufacturers using Android. Is there a guarantee that a customer can use Mono for commercial applications, without a shake down from Microsoft?

* Mono is backed by Novell and not Google

* From the Mono Licensing FAQ [1]: "Microsoft has announced that the ECMA standards for C# and the CLI are covered under the Community Promise patent license. Basically a grant is given to anyone who want to implement those components for free and for any purpose."

* The Novell-Microsoft agreements provide further protection for companies that choose to use Mono. [1]

* Many companies are using Mono for commercial purposes. There is a list at http://www.mono-project.com/Companies_Using_Mono

* Notably, Linden Studios uses Mono for Second Life servers. (See http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Mono)

[1] http://www.mono-project.com/Licensing#Patents

Re: I finally understand why I'm not allowed to use Lisp

#17

Post by gsivil » Sun, Feb 20, 2011, 1:29 AM UTC

I find nothing interesting in the original post to be honest. Just somebody that has a superficial impression about C# is complaining. Even the first 25 comments that I read are of no particular interest.

Meta: I wildly guess the HN post gets all the upvotes because initally people think that it will be about a google employee not allowed to use Lisp in google.

Re: I finally understand why I'm not allowed to use Lisp

#18

Post by DougBTX » Sun, Feb 20, 2011, 1:32 AM UTC

ddkrone wrote: post #13

The same can be said for any statically typed language. Any language that binds types as late as possible is infinitely more enjoyable to work with than one that fixes types at compile time. Short of developing missile guidance systems I don't think static types are warranted for anything.

For me type inference changes the picture, since it reduces the duplication you see throughout Java-style statically typed code, but doesn't give up all the benefits.

Re: I finally understand why I'm not allowed to use Lisp

#19

Post by nyellin » Sun, Feb 20, 2011, 1:34 AM UTC

gsivil wrote: post #17

I find nothing interesting in the original post to be honest. Just somebody that has a superficial impression about C# is complaining. Even the first 25 comments that I read are of no particular interest. Meta: I wildly guess the HN post gets all the upvotes because initally people think that it will be about a google employee not allowed to use Lisp in google.

Yes, I also expected an official Google stance on using Lisp.

I am new to HN, but I think you should try to read posts before you vote them up. At least that is what I do, after clicking on the comments page. Often, HN comments are even more valuable than the article itself.

Re: I finally understand why I'm not allowed to use Lisp

#20

Post by rorrr » Sun, Feb 20, 2011, 1:39 AM UTC

Kudos to his manager for actually looking at the code and recognizing the problem. Maintainable code is extremely important. Just keep your code simple. Adding another layer of abstraction instead of writing a simple and readable loop (if the language doesn't have accumulators) is not a good solution.

I've seen this too many times. Smart developers write complex code, just because they can (and often it does make it shorter), but then mid- and junior-level developer struggle with it. So company has to spend more money on smarter developers.

Here's a relevant post by Linus:

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/57643...