|
|
|
|
|
by lispm
1229 days ago
|
|
But that does not mean that the code is compatible to Lisp. To mention that it is written in Lisp is mostly meaningless, since the wider Lisp family has 100 incompatible languages. Try to run it in Emacs Lisp. Thus it makes sense to mention in what actual programming language it is written in. |
|
It's not wrong to say that something written in a Lisp is written "in Lisp". It's less than maximally precise, but people who are interested in Lisp will understand that "which Lisp?" is a question of import here. People who are not yet interested in Lisp, on the other hand, could well see this sort of pettifogging by someone clearly invested in it as a reason to avoid becoming more so.
I think that'd be a shame, because learning to understand the concepts that underpin Lisps has informed my approach to my work, even in other languages, and just generally made me a better programmer; I think it's good for just about anyone to have that experience in some degree. So I think it's worth not representing the language family or the community around it in ways that make it less likely more people will decide to take an interest.
Besides, Lisp can be a lot of fun! As indeed it is here. So, y'know. Maybe it's worth being less concerned over how people talk about it, and more glad they find it worth the time to talk about at all.