FORTH

You just admitted the market is run by stupid people who don't know what they want.

Business is the reason why technology exists.
Even government acts like a business to an extant, with taxes being funding, and the product being military protection, electricity, plumbing, and road maintenance.
Without incentive there is no reason for technology.

So you're saying the entirety of the military, medical, aerospace, civilian, and engineering market is retarded for picking software you don't like? That is the most pretentious argument I ever heard.

Attached: gplus-860083138.jpg (1232x1040, 123.37K)

I know this is bait but I'll bite:

People who think this shit in real life are insufferable faggots who have 0 concept of how much abstraction there already is between them programming in "real" languages bare metal. The amount of abstraction that's achieved by going from logic gates to C is fucking astronomical, and you could probably never achieve writing a C compiler from bare metal in your entire life if it weren't for the work of hundreds of years of mathematicians working all this shit out for you. Comparatively, the jump from C to Python is minuscule in the grand scheme of things. Sure it might abstract away a few data structures and make things nicer to use, but it's nothing compared to carefully organizing bits of sand together in such a way that they perform actual computation.

Computer science and abstraction are tied together at the hip. Losers who can't understand that the continuous abstraction of mathematics is the very essence of computing are the most obnoxious fucking faggots in the world. The losers who can't understand that it's actually harder to think abstractly are the funniest of them all. Sure you can do the equivalent of hand-holding a modern abacus. You're not accomplishing anything by reinventing the wheel for the thousandth time, you're just doing it because someone needs some retarded shit to be fast, but you're not furthering the field of computer-science. You're not developing new fucking algorithms in C, you're implementing something that someone (far smarter than you) has already thought of in a slightly different flavor just so you can get a paycheck.

How intellectually dishonest do you have to be to twist your own argument like this?
You literally admitted in your previous post that something being successful is often due to "stupid people not knowing what they want", then you went and justified Unix's success because of "natural selection", ignoring that it could have very well been the same as with Windows (hint: it is).
Please finish high school before posting again.

parens:
(lynch (convict (arrest nigger)) (tie rope) tree)

stack:
tree rope tie nigger arrest convict lynch

What's the big deal, you just do things in reverse order?

inb4 abstraction is bloat. There's a reason why we don't write application programs for high performance general computers in assembly - it takes a significantly more human resources to complete the application in assembly.

Its not a typeless programming language, in fact C would be closer to that. Maybe you're referring to static typing?
Forth would be an example of a typeless programming language.
There's a statically typed Lisp called Typed Racket out there, too: docs.racket-lang.org/ts-reference/index.html
You might as well be complaining about Lua, Golang, C#, JVM languages, or Python, whether its good or bad depends on your use case.
Recursion is probably the most obvious example of something being optimized in Lisp dialects. I've used desktop programs that use a lot of Common Lisp before, its not slow or anything, a lot better than mashing in Python or an entire web browser into the program which is popular nowadays.
If you cram everything onto one line, like most other languages, it gets harder to read. Just indent properly and use some paren editing software. Highlighting selected pair's regions always worked well for pairs in any language using pairs of characters for me.

You have never used Lisp once in your life and you know nothing about it. Go away.
Common Lisp, with proper optional type declarations, can be almost as fast as C. And performance is not even what really makes it good.

"Practical Common Lisp" is a good starting point if you want to get to actually make stuff quickly.
And yes, it's available online for free.

Kek, no.

this is pasta

No. LISP has no type system.