[nextos]

I've written quite a lot of Clojure and some Racket, but never really settled down on CL aside from reading PCL and most of PAIP.

In other words, I never coded something sufficiently big to understand the pros of CL.

Hence, I'm curious. What stuff I'm missing out in terms of language features and libraries?

[medo-bear]

for me the following things stand out

use common lisp (sbcl) if you want c-level performance

use common lisp if you want to make optimizing compilers

use common lisp if you want smalltalk type repl driven interactive development

[rscho]

I'm not a compiler expert by any means, but I would've thought the more functional nature of racket to be a plus for writing compilers. Plus, there's the nanopass framework.

[lispm]

There is no shortage of Lisp compilers.

The new Racket compiler was derived from the Chez Scheme compiler.

[medo-bear]

ohh ... almost forgot ... CLOS

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Lisp_Object_System

[abudabi123]

I'm curious to know what was lost to the Lisp users in the change on Apple's Newton device going from the early Ralph implementation in Lisp to cplusplus.

On r/lisp there was a rant that included a reflection that things would be done in a third the time. There was an ask for $60M to apply Lisp to know a different world. Apple can easily afford a $180M experiment to see Ralph/Dylan implementation of iOS/macOS. If proved successful would the software platform leap how the hardware has done across multiple architectures? The ARM M series devices are a there and back again move given Apple Newton was on ARM and Apple invested which kept the idea alive.