"Dann Corbit" <·······@solutionsiq.com> starts a C++/Lisp war...
>What a load of crap. If you are talking about 'return on investment' C++
>is absurdly higher than Common Lisp.
No it's not. Not by a long shot.
>Look at the amount of development
>that is going on in C++ and compare it with what is going on in Lisp.
What exactly does that prove??
>Only
>a fool will thing they will get a higher ROI from a study of Lisp, which is
>at least as difficult to master as C++.
No it's not.
>Go to a bookstore, and see how
>much effort is being put forth to provide C++ instruction, compared to
>Lisp.
Show's how much more difficult C++ is that it needs so many books to
explain it.
>Will you be able to use your Lisp skills on every platform you might
>need to work on?
Yes, definitely.
>Look at the tools that are available for C++ compared to
>Lisp. Will you be able to pull a big pile of Lisp code into your design
>tool and automatically create object diagrams from it?
Yes, of course.
>On dozens of
>platforms?
Sure.
>Yes, I do realize that Smalltalk and Lisp are viable tools that
>do answer real-life business problems. Sometimes they are the best tool
>for the job. Just less often than C++.
Wrong.
>How many trained programming
>resources does a typical organization have for C++ verses those
>alternatives?
What does that prove?
>Neither Smalltalk nor Lisp will ever have the following
What does that prove?
>nor
>the utility that C++ does.
Wrong.
>As always, all this stuff is IMO - YMMV.
If it's just your opinion, then why go around stating this crap as facts?