|
|
|
|
|
|
by trapper
6011 days ago
|
|
|
If the effect size is large (i.e. the magnitude of difference between the means of lisp vs non-lisp programmers) the size of problem should be irrelevant. Many thousands of programmers spend hours each week in pissing matches online. Why is it none of them feel like truly putting their money where their mouth is? |
|
|
Writing a "Hello, world" is going to take about the same amount of time in any language that isn't a turing tarpit. At issue is generally some sort of asymptotic advantage, not a guarantee of "language X will always be superior every time always". In fact, for any pair of one easy and one hard problem, I'm pretty confident I could find (or invent, if necessary) two languages that each beat the other for solving one of the problems.
The claimed benefits of a more expressive language generally involve things like better management of application complexity, or greater ability to modify and restructure late in the project. Hammering out a program of a scale such that the programmer can keep an accurate model of the entire thing in mind at one time, and that is only written and never modified, would be more a measure of the programmer's typing speed and the sophistication of the IDE used than anything else.