[mindcrime]

My favorite current tools are Common Lisp systems, but that's because I can't have Ralph and Leibniz anymore.

You said below that you don't find modern day Dylan to be as valuable. I don't know much about Dylan, either the pre-1992 version or the newer version(s), but I'm curious if you would elaborate on why the older Dylan was so much superior to modern Dylan in your view?

[mikelevins]

Because modern Dylan is not an old-fashioned Lisp.

I prefer working the old-fashioned Lisp way. I start my Lisp and tell it, an expression at a time, how to be the app I want. Modern Dylan doesn't work like that. It's much more a batch-compiled affair, where you write a lot of definitions and compile them all at once to yield an artifact.

Modern Dylan does not have a Lisp-style repl that you can use to gradually build up your app interactively, teaching the runtime new tricks, and incrementally querying it to examine what you've built--as I did when working on the Dylan Newton.

For a while, Bruce Michener and I discussed what it would take to restore that kind of support to OpenDylan, but in the end I concluded it was an impractical amount of work.

[mindcrime]

Gotcha. I've never really used OpenDylan, but I've had it on my "list of things to learn one day" for a while, so just curious about your take on that. I didn't realize that old Dylan had a lisp style REPL and that new Dylan doesn't.