Show HN: Rust but Lisp

Scheme already has hygenic macros, I don't get why you'd vibecode a worse (less battle tested, llm-generated) replacement. I'm not sure why this hit the front-page, to be honest, because it doesn't seem noteworthy or interesting (Anyone and their mother can vibecode something like this in eight hours)

Re: Show HN: Rust but Lisp

#5

Post by GalaxyNova » Sat, May 09, 2026, 10:59 PM UTC

It seems like this is more like writing Rust in an s-expression syntax instead of having a proper lisp dialect that compiles to Rust, which is cool I guess but not very interesting.

It's quite weird-looking for someone who's done any amount of lisp programming.

Re: Show HN: Rust but Lisp

#6

Post by wk_end » Sat, May 09, 2026, 11:01 PM UTC

fao_ wrote: post #4

macmac wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To get proper macros.

Scheme already has hygenic macros, I don't get why you'd vibecode a worse (less battle tested, llm-generated) replacement. I'm not sure why this hit the front-page, to be honest, because it doesn't seem noteworthy or interesting (Anyone and their mother can vibecode something like this in eight hours)

Scheme doesn't have Rust semantics, though?

Re: Show HN: Rust but Lisp

#7

Post by hawkice » Sat, May 09, 2026, 11:13 PM UTC

I think some comments are missing the upside of it being precisely Rust, without any new semantics. If you want lisp that compiles to machine code, Common Lisp can get reasonably efficient. The purpose of bringing Rust into it is to surface Rust-specific semantics -- which many people quite like!

Re: Show HN: Rust but Lisp

#8

Post by stuaxo » Sat, May 09, 2026, 11:18 PM UTC

"no runtime, no GC, just" I am BEGGING every project to not have this LLMism in their docs.

It reads as No X no Y just slop to me every time.

Re: Show HN: Rust but Lisp

#9

Post by zem » Sat, May 09, 2026, 11:23 PM UTC

fao_ wrote: post #4

macmac wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To get proper macros.

Scheme already has hygenic macros, I don't get why you'd vibecode a worse (less battle tested, llm-generated) replacement. I'm not sure why this hit the front-page, to be honest, because it doesn't seem noteworthy or interesting (Anyone and their mother can vibecode something like this in eight hours)

this is not a replacement for scheme, it's simply an alternative syntax for rust

Re: Show HN: Rust but Lisp

#10

Post by shawn_w » Sat, May 09, 2026, 11:38 PM UTC

GalaxyNova wrote: post #5

It seems like this is more like writing Rust in an s-expression syntax instead of having a proper lisp dialect that compiles to Rust, which is cool I guess but not very interesting. It's quite weird-looking for someone who's done any amount of lisp programming.

A let that defines variables that have a lifetime beyond the scope of the expression? Yeah, that's really unusual. And it's not even the oddest looking thing from the first example block of code.