Re: Lisp considered unfinished

[barmar@nic.near.net (Barry Margolin)]

In article <ddyerD9pqo2.GKx@netcom.com> ddyer@netcom.com writes:
>Despite many millions that went into Symbolics, LMI, TI and Xerox
>(both directly and to their customers) there is not *ONE* really well
>known "lisp" success story to point to; and on the flip side,
>everybody knows how much was invested in those companies, and where
>they are now.

I believe that quite a bit of the space station code was being developed in
Lisp.  At least it was a few years ago; that may have changed.

Another Lisp success story was Desert Storm.  Much of the logistics was
done using Symbolics Lisp.

Part of the problem is that Lisp is best suited to large, dynamic
applications like these.  For such applications, the overhead that's often
associated with Lisp is not noticeable, while the power and flexibility of
Lisp is incredibly helpful.  But before programmers can use Lisp for large
applications they need to get their feet wet on small ones, and Lisp
usually isn't the appropriate language for little applications (the 5MB
"hello world" binary is the usual example).  Using Lisp for a little
application is like using a jack hammer when you just need a screwdriver;
but using C for a large application is like trying to break up a sidewalk
with a screwdriver and hammern.
-- 
Barry Margolin
BBN Planet Corporation, Cambridge, MA
barmar@{bbnplanet.com,near.net,nic.near.net}
Phone (617) 873-3126 - Fax (617) 873-5124