Live data from Hacker News

How knowing Lisp destroyed my programming career (2006)

coding.derkeiler.com

121–130 of 433 posts

Re: How knowing Lisp destroyed my programming career (2006)

#121
post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your confusion will go away once you recognize that Scheme is not Lisp. For most purposes, Lisp means Common Lisp, or one of the Lisps that ended up merging into Common Lisp. That means that Lisp does all of these things and more, which you might not expect if you've only seen Scheme/SICP: * Multi-paradigm programming (functional programming in the immutable sense is not dominant, the Lisp OOP system is top class, mu…

To add to the confusion, this Wikipedia article says that Scheme is "one of the two main dialects of Lisp." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheme_(programming_language)

Well, it was true, at least until clojure. Now we've got clojure, common lisp and scheme.

Re: How knowing Lisp destroyed my programming career (2006)

#122
post #69
post #40

For a while now I've had a feeling that all the comments about lack of engineers(especially in software) are vastly underestimated. Probably around 10% of us is capable of doing actual software development. The rest writes plumbing and can handle the project for only as long as abstractions available through libraries can hold the complexity. If we assume most of us don't really know what we're doing, that totally ex…

Maintaining a distinction between "actual software development" and "plumbing" is elitist, even if you're placing yourself on the downside of that comparison and setting yourself up for imposter syndrome. You can get an awful lot done by "plumbing". Entire businesses like SAP are built on it. It can also be mission critical; in SpaceX, is the literal plumbing of hydraulic fluid and fuel flow unimportant? No.

What if reality is elitist? Are you saying that because you don’t like a certain thing, then it can’t be reality?

> Entire businesses like SAP

Companies like SAP mostly waste people’s money by extracting huge sums from municipalities.

Re: How knowing Lisp destroyed my programming career (2006)

#123
post #94
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mine too. Until Erlang, and now Ada. I'm building myself a harem.

That's the second time I've seen Ada mentioned in as many days. Before that, I did Ada as an undergrad about 1989 and never heard of it again. Is it becoming a thing again?

In Europe yes, Ada has been a constant presence at FOSDEM in the last decade and many universities.

This has taken off since we finally got an open source Ada compiler (GNAT) without the typical enterprise/military prices.

Also Ada 2012 is quite different from Ada 83.

Then we have this, https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/opmemc-1/memor... increasing exponentially every day thanks networked computers.

Re: How knowing Lisp destroyed my programming career (2006)

#124
post #40

For a while now I've had a feeling that all the comments about lack of engineers(especially in software) are vastly underestimated. Probably around 10% of us is capable of doing actual software development. The rest writes plumbing and can handle the project for only as long as abstractions available through libraries can hold the complexity. If we assume most of us don't really know what we're doing, that totally ex…

Why do you think that writing those tools is harder? Oftentimes it is not. A lot of it is easy.

Yes, well done abstractions are how we keep large projects manageable. No one can learn all of them at once. Neither those writing "plumbing" nor those doing libraries.

Re: How knowing Lisp destroyed my programming career (2006)

#125
post #25

This is from 2006 though. Since then functional programming has picked up a lot of steam again, and I'm pretty sure having been a lisper for 30 years gets you good jobs. If not in Lisp, haskell, F#, clojure or whatever...

Lisp isn't a functional programming language. It's multi-paradigm.

More importantly it isn’t statically typed (like F#, Haskell, etc)

Re: How knowing Lisp destroyed my programming career (2006)

#126
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maintaining a distinction between "actual software development" and "plumbing" is elitist, even if you're placing yourself on the downside of that comparison and setting yourself up for imposter syndrome. You can get an awful lot done by "plumbing". Entire businesses like SAP are built on it. It can also be mission critical; in SpaceX, is the literal plumbing of hydraulic fluid and fuel flow unimportant? No.

> Maintaining a distinction between "actual software development" and "plumbing" is elitist You are correct - however, it doesn't mean that this statement is necessarily wrong. Usually when I see a statement that reeks of elitism, I immediately assume lower probability of it being true, because elitism of a statement correlates with falsehood - but it's worth remembering that this correlation is not absolute, and som…

I'd say you're basically redefining elitism to mean something it doesn't mean (or at least not how it's used here).

That said, I do agree with you. I think that 1) it can be be very important to make distinctions between types of programmers, because 2) it makes it easier to actively explore the field and finding what suits your 'type'.

For example, for many people, someone who 'does' HTML/CSS with some jQuery plugins, is a programmer. But personally I'd not really call such a person a programmer. I don't mean that as a value judgment, but rather to make a distinction between 'types' of work.

Making that distinction earlier in my career could've helped me (whether the label it programmer/non-programmer is used or not), because I spent more time than I'd have liked being such a HTML/CSS/JS guy. I learned tons of very specific rules/tricks/lore that were necessary, but did not help as a programmer, and spent countless hours doing this kind of work, not really enjoying it all that much.

It was only when I started doing 'proper' javascript stuff that I realized how much fun programming is, and how my relative enjoyment of the whole front-end stuff depended on the bits of 'real programming' I would occasionally get to do. In hindsight I wish I'd figured that out earlier, and not spent so many brain cycles and storage on CSS layout tricks and discussing how much 'semantic HTML' matters.

(thankfully those things are still useful when I do full-stack type stuff, but still)

Re: How knowing Lisp destroyed my programming career (2006)

#127
post #95
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maintaining a distinction between "actual software development" and "plumbing" is elitist, even if you're placing yourself on the downside of that comparison and setting yourself up for imposter syndrome. You can get an awful lot done by "plumbing". Entire businesses like SAP are built on it. It can also be mission critical; in SpaceX, is the literal plumbing of hydraulic fluid and fuel flow unimportant? No.

I'm not trying to impose that one is more "noble" than the other. As you said yourself, businesses usually run on plumbing. I'm trying to understand the industry, as it appears to be(at least to me) different than what I thought was true. I believe it to be important if we're going to do better and there is a ton of metrics showing we should do better(percent of projects failing, percent on projects exceeding budget…

Crunch has zero to do with quality of programmers or tooling.

It has everything to do with management practices, organization, anxiety, fear or personal wish to be seen as hero.

Re: How knowing Lisp destroyed my programming career (2006)

#128
post #111
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortunately JavaScript doesn't have the problem described by the OP: "With a secret weapon like Lisp in my arsenal in 1986 I could blow my competition out of the water with one hand tied behind my back and holding a martini in the other." A present-day JavaScript practitioner will have his left hand busy trying to figure out what's this week's fashionable way to pass around some data in this month's fashionable frame…

JavaScript is for HN what sex is for highscool : those who talk the most about it are those who practise it the less. If JS devs were not able to focus on bringing value they wouldn't be able to hold jobs, build products nor profitable companies. If JS was so impratical there would not be so many people choosing it over various alternatives for building GUIs, games, websites, WebGL/WebVR, back-end services and so on.…

> You don't make npm "work"

Maybe not, but I did spend a whole day trying to get a Polymer example work at all.

Re: How knowing Lisp destroyed my programming career (2006)

#129
post #100
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to elaborate?

Well Perl 6 is pretty much a completely different language and it certainly didn't exist back then. I guess you could still be using Perl 5.x but iirc modern day projects use things like Moose which is relatively new too.

IME when talking about "Perl", most people consider that to be Perl5 and not Perl 6. Giving that Perl 6 can be and often is considered a different language.

But yeah, I agree with you about Moose. But I also stand by my opinion that Perl changed muss less than C++ or Java in that time period.

Re: How knowing Lisp destroyed my programming career (2006)

#130

I came to Lisp (Scheme/Racket) from that another side (C++, Java, Perl) and it was an enlightening experience. Now I use Lisp nearly everywhere in a form of a small .NET runtime module. Lisp is excellent at templating tasks. Just for comparison: StringTemplate for .NET is a whooping 400 kB of compiled binary code while my implementation of Lisp is just 35 kB (!). Sure enough, Lisp does the very same thing as StringTe…

>Lisp is Turing-complete while StringTemplate doesn't.

Well...C# String interpolation is.

Post reply on HN