Earlier quoted context omitted.
C) lisp is a "10x" language? I can't be similarly productive in a language that doesn't have a simple syntax (easy to write) and doesn't allow you to do meaningful live programming. By the time you've got a major headcount, organizational bottlenecks will render the individual velocity of programming tools irrelevant. Lisp will scale poorly because every language does. It's hard to justify unusual technical choices i…
> Lisp will scale poorly because every language does I guarantee you that a highly opinionated language like Go scales horizontally better* than a totally unopinionated language like Common Lisp. It's literally why Google spent a bunch of resources developing it. It's also why Lispers tend to despise Golang, or deride it as a simple language for average developers. *Requires fewer resources to get a new hire up and r…
Unlike its creators, who were quite blunt in saying it's simple language for middling devs.
(Other than the part where it's essentially new version of C from alternative world)