[tjarratt]

I'll see your emacs as "best proof" and raise you node.js - sure it's C++ underneath, but few people are going to argue that interpreted javascript is "close to machine code". For some tasks, elisp is a clunky and slower than writing a shell script or small python/ruby/javascript process to do the same work. I don't even want to mention the horror that is finding correct documentation for a given version of emacs lisp compared to any other software or language.

disclosure: I'm currently writing a small node server in emacs. I'm happy with both as they are very responsive, but emacs does chug occasionally like a bro at a frat house.

[_cbsz]

node.js isn't interpreted; it uses V8, which is a JIT.

[dkarl]

No matter how the underlying implementation works, programming in neither Emacs Lisp nor Javascript could be described as "sticking close to machine code the whole time," as the original comment stated.

[technomancy]

Emacs Lisp is also typically byte-compiled.

[mahmud]

JIT != byte compilation.