[aleksv]

Oh yea, to me Lisp looks like Python, that's far from C, and usually it's a "interpreted" language, far from machine. Java and PHP is an example of interpreted language that's close to C, you can easily switch your mind from Java/PHP to "big boys" C/C++ if needed, and back. C/C++ is best paid "for hire" language, for a reason.

[lispm]

> Lisp looks like Python, that's far from C, and usually it's a "interpreted" language, far from machine

the currently most popular Common Lisp implementation is based around an optimizing native code compiler. That compiler has its roots in the early 80s.

See http://sbcl.org .

It's far from being 'interpreted'.

[aleksv]

Yes, I understand. Python can also be compiled to native code, if its developers decide to go that way. PHP8 is JIT compiled by now. It's more about being "closer to the machine". You can solve much more practical coding problems being "closer to the machine". Just check which class of specialists use Lisp/Python, compare to C/C++. I guess the initial question is "how to be relevant for a longer time on this market". Native code is a very big market, considering "IOT", much like website dev market. Can't say the same about Lisp and Python.

[lispm]

> Python can also be compiled to native code, if its developers decide to go that way

With Lisp this is usually done. The first compiler has been written early 60s. Since then zillions have been implemented and used.

> It's more about being "closer to the machine".

If one looks at a single CPU Lisp can compile itself to fast code, even in the range of 50% slower than C - compared to standard Python which can be much slower, unless computation stays in the Python libs which are written in C.

Where Lisp loses is the whole infrastructure to more advanced parts of the hardware and the systems. Linux for example is largely defined with C level interfaces. Lisp uses them, as foreign code and data - it can't use its GC managed memory.

> Native code is a very big market

Still Lisp compiles to native code, usually. There must be other reasons than native code.

[eimrine]

Oh no, my question is not about money at all. My question is about being mighty scientist having some programming skills as core ability. Also my question is about being a good man, for example, I do not want to develop (or to help to develop) any malware, weapons, fake news providers and surveillance stuff.

[aleksv]

For science, Python probably, it gained much tracktion in scientific community in the recent couple of years. But it's only a subset of "programming". C-like languages usually offer to become full-time programmer. In science you may need to read books and papers more often than to code I think.

[eimrine]

By the way, I do not think I need advices about good ways. Please, bad ways only.

[aleksv]

You can only create "bad" code in programming, there's nothing bad in programming I know of. Ah, don't forget that as per GitHub statistics, programmers usually have psycho-neurological problems, it's a hard thing for the mind to stay in balance.