Happy New Year everyone. I've been wondering, how many Lispers
use Lisp to make a living? If you do use Lisp, how much do you
use it? If not, what language or languages do you use? How much
of an uberhacker does one have to be to make a living with Lisp?
And if one isn't quite that accomplished, what are marketable
alternatives that are better than Java and C++?
--
Dan
www.prairienet.org/~dsb/
From: Paul Tarvydas
Subject: Re: What language(s) do you use at work?
Date:
Message-ID: <flgbsv$igl$1@aioe.org>
Dan Bensen wrote:
> Happy New Year everyone. I've been wondering, how many Lispers
> use Lisp to make a living? If you do use Lisp, how much do you
> use it? If not, what language or languages do you use? How much
English and Lispworks CL.
This OEM product: www.visualframeworksinc.com is currently written in
Lispworks.
Another product, for the printing marketplace, is done in C (my partner's
prejudice) and Lispworks (my prejudice).
pt
We use Lispworks Enterprise for our core product, with Java doing the
infrastructure and client interface stuff. I personally am a full-time
Lisp developer.
-- david
On Jan 2, 5:58 am, Dan Bensen <··········@cyberspace.net> wrote:
> If not, what language or languages do you use?
I mostly use a variant of English characterized by a density of nasty
expletives which make gangster rap look like gospel verse.
Dan Bensen <··········@cyberspace.net> writes:
> Happy New Year everyone. I've been wondering, how many Lispers use
> Lisp to make a living? If you do use Lisp, how much do you use it?
> If not, what language or languages do you use?
I use Python at work; I'm hoping to start using Lisp at some point
within the next year. The nice thing about Python is that a lot of the
annoying little stuff has already been taken care of; the nice thing
about Lisp is that it's Lisp.
I'm a sysadmin who does a fair amount of automation, data consolidation,
web front-ending and that sort of thing--Python is a nice fit, but it'd
be nice to playing with Lisp for this stuff.
--
Robert Uhl <http://public.xdi.org/=ruhl>
prepBut nI vrbLike adjHungarian! qWhat's artThe adjBig nProblem?
-- Alec Flett
From: Edi Weitz
Subject: Re: What language(s) do you use at work?
Date:
Message-ID: <usl1gfd7v.fsf@agharta.de>
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 07:58:52 -0600, Dan Bensen <··········@cyberspace.net> wrote:
> I've been wondering, how many Lispers use Lisp to make a living?
I don't think anybody has exact numbers. The recent postings from Dan
Weinreb about the number of Lispers at ITA should give you a very
pessimistic lower bound at least. Then you have to take into account
that there are two companies who seem to be doing well selling Lisp
compilers. Try to estimate how many compilers they'll have to sell
each year. I think it is fair to assume that the majority of their
customers aren't hobbyists. And of course you don't know how many
commercial projects (witness ITA) use open source compilers.
My /guess/ would be that the answer is a number with four figures. Or
do you guys think that I'm totally off?
Oh, and don't forget that most Lispers doing real work probably never
read c.l.l or (gasp!) take the time to engage in discussions here. In
fact, I personally know several full-time Lispers who never ever
posted one article to c.l.l or a Lisp-related mailing list. I think
they call this the "silent majority."
> If you do use Lisp, how much do you use it?
I personally use it 100% of the time.
> How much of an uberhacker does one have to be to make a living with
> Lisp?
You don't need to be an �berhacker. But you need some experience.
You can't expect to learn the language in January and to utilize it to
pay your bills in March.
Edi.
--
European Common Lisp Meeting, Amsterdam, April 19/20, 2008
http://weitz.de/eclm2008/
Real email: (replace (subseq ·········@agharta.de" 5) "edi")
Edi Weitz wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 07:58:52 -0600, Dan Bensen <··········@cyberspace.net> wrote:
>
>> I've been wondering, how many Lispers use Lisp to make a living?
>
> I don't think anybody has exact numbers. The recent postings from Dan
> Weinreb about the number of Lispers at ITA should give you a very
> pessimistic lower bound at least. Then you have to take into account
> that there are two companies who seem to be doing well selling Lisp
> compilers. Try to estimate how many compilers they'll have to sell
> each year. I think it is fair to assume that the majority of their
> customers aren't hobbyists. And of course you don't know how many
> commercial projects (witness ITA) use open source compilers.
>
> My /guess/ would be that the answer is a number with four figures. Or
> do you guys think that I'm totally off?
>
> Oh, and don't forget that most Lispers doing real work probably never
> read c.l.l or (gasp!) take the time to engage in discussions here. In
> fact, I personally know several full-time Lispers who never ever
> posted one article to c.l.l or a Lisp-related mailing list. I think
> they call this the "silent majority."
>
>> If you do use Lisp, how much do you use it?
>
> I personally use it 100% of the time.
You must be very lucky :)
>
>> How much of an uberhacker does one have to be to make a living with
>> Lisp?
>
> You don't need to be an �berhacker. But you need some experience.
> You can't expect to learn the language in January and to utilize it to
> pay your bills in March.
>
> Edi.
>
I know ONE company that sells Lisp products. I think to work there might
me my only chance to get a job as a Lisp programmer :(
Michael
From: Edi Weitz
Subject: Re: What language(s) do you use at work?
Date:
Message-ID: <uodc4f6xz.fsf@agharta.de>
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 16:51:53 +0100, Michael Bohn <············@gmx.de> wrote:
>> I personally use it 100% of the time.
>
> You must be very lucky :)
No, it wasn't luck, I worked towards it. I've been working as an
independent consultant for about ten years now, and in the beginning I
paid my rent writing code in PHP (yuk!), Perl, C, and sometimes Java.
At some point I "discovered" Lisp and I liked it so much that I first
hacked on it in my spare time and then gradually tried to employ it
for my "real" work as well. Sometimes I had to convince customers
that the task they wanted to be done in Perl or whatever could as well
(or better) be done in Lisp, sometimes they simply didn't care as long
as the resulting application did what it was supposed to do.
Since about 2003 (IIRC) I've used Lisp exclusively. I've also worked
on several projects by now where the client was explictly looking for
Lisp hackers which I think is mainly a result of meeting people at
Lisp conferences and of Lisp code I've published online.
Anyway, the bottom line of what I'm trying to say is that if you're
willing to accept a certain risk, it is easier to steer things into
your preferred direction. (Maybe, it is also easier to fail, but
that's life.) If you work as an employee, you'll probably have a warm
and fuzzy feeling because someone else is taking the risk off of your
shoulders, but then you can't really complain why they don't offer you
a Lisp job. TANSTAAFL, I'm afraid.
Edi.
--
European Common Lisp Meeting, Amsterdam, April 19/20, 2008
http://weitz.de/eclm2008/
Real email: (replace (subseq ·········@agharta.de" 5) "edi")
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 18:55:36 +0100, Edi Weitz wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 16:51:53 +0100, Michael Bohn <············@gmx.de>
> wrote:
>
>>> I personally use it 100% of the time.
>>
>> You must be very lucky :)
>
> No, it wasn't luck, I worked towards it.
[snip]
Great post Edi. Most people don't seem to grasp that goals aren't
immediate and require working towards.
Now I really want to meet all four of you [1] :-)
[1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.lib.tbnl.general/1436
--
Sohail Somani
http://uint32t.blogspot.com
In article <·············@agharta.de>, Edi Weitz <········@agharta.de>
wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 07:58:52 -0600, Dan Bensen <··········@cyberspace.net> wrote:
>
> > I've been wondering, how many Lispers use Lisp to make a living?
>
> I don't think anybody has exact numbers. The recent postings from Dan
> Weinreb about the number of Lispers at ITA should give you a very
> pessimistic lower bound at least. Then you have to take into account
> that there are two companies who seem to be doing well selling Lisp
> compilers. Try to estimate how many compilers they'll have to sell
> each year. I think it is fair to assume that the majority of their
> customers aren't hobbyists.
Actually I think there are currently quite a lot hobbyists
(even more potential) and the commercial vendors may want
to rethink that potential.
Hobbyists are
* victims of the Halo effect of other languages (Ruby, ...)
* ex-Lisp-developer who have a different day-to-day job.
Lisp developers also tend to migrate into management
(team / project) jobs. This is not unusual for developers
in general. Myself, I have been working in project and team
management for the last years.
* there are also lots of semi-hobbyists exploring/developing Lisp
software quite deeply, with some hope to eventually get/find/take
a Lisp job
* then there are the 'addicts'
----
When we look at ITA, they are developing the business layer in Lisp.
Most enterprise projects I saw use Java in the business layer.
To do it with Lisp, you need experienced people (and a good
management). Failure would be catastrophic. You better
have people that can create the necessary infrastructure (stuff
you can buy for Java) and know how to do that.
But ITA might be interesting for another reason. Here a newcomer
tries to replace (really) old software developed and maintained by
other companies. Is that a model or is that only possible
in that special combination (location, people, money, management,
domain, target competition, customer, ...)?
> And of course you don't know how many
> commercial projects (witness ITA) use open source compilers.
>
> My /guess/ would be that the answer is a number with four figures. Or
> do you guys think that I'm totally off?
>
> Oh, and don't forget that most Lispers doing real work probably never
> read c.l.l or (gasp!) take the time to engage in discussions here. In
> fact, I personally know several full-time Lispers who never ever
> posted one article to c.l.l or a Lisp-related mailing list. I think
> they call this the "silent majority."
That's also my experience. Most full-time Lisp users I met
never post here. Same for most ex-full-time Lisp users.
Sometimes they are not allowed to talk
about what they do and how they do it.
Some use mailing lists from time to time. The commercial
support of some vendors might know some of them.
There is also some chance to meet those people at some Lisp
conference or meeting (hint, hint, ...). For many this
has been described as an 'interesting' experience - at a
conference you are suddenly surrounded by lots of other Lisp people.
For every Lisper at a conference there might also be several from the same
company that stayed at home.
>
> > If you do use Lisp, how much do you use it?
>
> I personally use it 100% of the time.
>
> > How much of an uberhacker does one have to be to make a living with
> > Lisp?
>
> You don't need to be an �berhacker. But you need some experience.
> You can't expect to learn the language in January and to utilize it to
> pay your bills in March.
Then there is the question how to get that experience. There is a double
fear: many potential Lisp developers fear about their 'market value'
when they do (only) Lisp work and whether there are enough jobs for
Lisp developers. On the other side, some companies think they should
not do Lisp-based projects, because they won't find (enough, competent)
Lisp hackers. Some start with Lisp and migrate later. But how
does one get experience if not in real world projects learning
from other experienced hackers?
Some Lisp hackers reported extreme job satisfaction.
Here is an example:
http://web.archive.org/web/20031005161140/http://home.earthlink.net/~kend0/ExtremeSuccess.html
'best people', 'best practice' and 'best technology' combined
with a successful project is a really cool experience.
>
> Edi.
--
http://lispm.dyndns.org/
??>> How much of an uberhacker does one have to be to make a living with
??>> Lisp?
EW> You don't need to be an ?berhacker. But you need some experience.
EW> You can't expect to learn the language in January and to utilize it to
EW> pay your bills in March.
i had some situations when i was starting learning new languages (Python, C#
...) exactly when utilizing them "to pay my bills in March".
maybe with Lisp it would require some more time to be effective.. but that
depends on employer -- i think some are ready to hire a person who doesn't
know language but is just willing to learn,
at least i've heard such stuff from people using Haskell.
> On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 07:58:52 -0600, Dan Bensen <··········@cyberspace.net> wrote:
> > How much of an uberhacker does one have to be to
> > make a living with Lisp?
On Jan 2, 9:40 am, Edi Weitz <········@agharta.de> wrote:
> You don't need to be an überhacker.
Thanks, Edi.
--
Dan
www.prairienet.org/~dsb/
Dan Bensen <··········@cyberspace.net> wrote:
+---------------
| Happy New Year everyone. I've been wondering, how many Lispers
| use Lisp to make a living? If you do use Lisp, how much do you
| use it? If not, what language or languages do you use?
+---------------
I use Lisp at work whenever I can get away with it, which isn't much:
basically, just one steadily-accreting-ball-of-mud that's my user-mode
hardware bringup/debugging tool [think mmap + peek/poke + a bunch of
convenience functions], plus the occasional "script" or config/build
tool or other meta-tool.
Otherwise, it's all C for Linux/Unix daemon/kernel/driver/embedded code.
[Plus a tiny bit of assembler, mostly x86, x86_64, & ARM].
-Rob
p.s. In my non-work life [yes, there *is* a smidgin of one] I use Lisp
in several web application servers, and for almost all coding I do
"for myself", e.g., mail filters/daemons, sysadmin "scripts", etc.
[And if I ever start a blog, it'll be in Lisp, too.]
-----
Rob Warnock <····@rpw3.org>
627 26th Avenue <URL:http://rpw3.org/>
San Mateo, CA 94403 (650)572-2607
In article <································@speakeasy.net>,
····@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) wrote:
> Dan Bensen <··········@cyberspace.net> wrote:
> +---------------
> | Happy New Year everyone. I've been wondering, how many Lispers
> | use Lisp to make a living? If you do use Lisp, how much do you
> | use it? If not, what language or languages do you use?
> +---------------
>
> I use Lisp at work whenever I can get away with it, which isn't much:
> basically, just one steadily-accreting-ball-of-mud that's my user-mode
> hardware bringup/debugging tool [think mmap + peek/poke + a bunch of
> convenience functions], plus the occasional "script" or config/build
> tool or other meta-tool.
>
> Otherwise, it's all C for Linux/Unix daemon/kernel/driver/embedded code.
> [Plus a tiny bit of assembler, mostly x86, x86_64, & ARM].
>
>
> -Rob
>
> p.s. In my non-work life [yes, there *is* a smidgin of one] I use Lisp
> in several web application servers, and for almost all coding I do
> "for myself", e.g., mail filters/daemons, sysadmin "scripts", etc.
> [And if I ever start a blog, it'll be in Lisp, too.]
You might be the right guy to write some Lisp-based drivers
for Movitz. ;-)
>
> -----
> Rob Warnock <····@rpw3.org>
> 627 26th Avenue <URL:http://rpw3.org/>
> San Mateo, CA 94403 (650)572-2607
--
http://lispm.dyndns.org/
Rainer Joswig <······@lisp.de> wrote:
+---------------
| ····@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) wrote:
| ...[trimmed]...
|
| You might be the right guy to write some Lisp-based drivers
| for Movitz. ;-)
+---------------
Yes, well, maybe, except for all those "round tuit" thingies
that I never seem to be able to find enough of... :-{
-Rob
p.s. Non-native speakers of English may require the following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuit
-----
Rob Warnock <····@rpw3.org>
627 26th Avenue <URL:http://rpw3.org/>
San Mateo, CA 94403 (650)572-2607
On Jan 2, 5:40 pm, ····@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) wrote:
> I use Lisp at work whenever I can get away with it, which
> isn't much: basically, just one steadily-accreting-ball-of-mud
> that's my user-mode hardware bringup/debugging tool
You say your Lisp code is a BoM? Can't you maintain it?
--Dan
www.prairienet.org/~dsb/
danb <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
+---------------
| ····@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) wrote:
| > I use Lisp at work whenever I can get away with it, which
| > isn't much: basically, just one steadily-accreting-ball-of-mud
| > that's my user-mode hardware bringup/debugging tool
|
| You say your Lisp code is a BoM? Can't you maintain it?
+---------------
The problem I'm solving *is* a ball-of-mud, so the Lisp code
merely reflects that. Consider the following work loop:
1. Somebody files a bug report about hardware X does task Y wrong
in situation Z on machine M.
2. I connect to machine M [either via SSH or a cnosole server,
depending on just how broken it is], and start up my user-mode
hardware debugging tool.
3. I poke around in the REPL trying to understand what the bug
reporter is talking about, trying to duplicate situation Z,
sometimes doing low-level peek/poke ops and sometimes calling
previously defined more complex display, scanning, or other
debugging functions.
4. Any time I find that I'm typing the same thing into the REPL
over & over -- or a sequence of related things that could be
generalized into a canned function -- I write a canned function
to do "the thing" (whatever), compile it [hardware debugging
tends to b performance-sensitive], and also add it to the source
of the tool. Now it's available the next time I run the tool,
and also available to others.
"This is how we grow the mud, grow the mud, grow the mud."
The rate of accretion *does* decrease over time, but never
goes entirely to zero.
5. Loop back to step 3, or 2, or 1, as appropriate.
So for any given domain [that is, hardware platform, operating
system, set of chips/cards being developed/debugged/upported],
the tool starts out small, just an OPFR-based REPL and a few
key basics (mmap, peel/poke/dump functions), and rapidly grows
just that set of additional canned functions that are needed
to debug the problems that arise in that domain.
The world isn't clean. the world *is* a "ball of mud". So a tool
which models the world ends up resembling that world as well.
The good news is that the Lisp code -- even "ball of mud" Lisp
code -- is *much* more maintainable (IMHO) over the long haul
than the messes of C or Tcl I used for this before I switched
to Lisp...
-Rob
-----
Rob Warnock <····@rpw3.org>
627 26th Avenue <URL:http://rpw3.org/>
San Mateo, CA 94403 (650)572-2607
> danb <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> | You say your Lisp code is a BoM? Can't you maintain it?
On Jan 4, 4:43 am, ····@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) wrote:
> The problem I'm solving *is* a ball-of-mud, ..... So a tool
> which models the world ends up resembling that world as well.
Good post, Rob. I'm glad to see Lisp being put to good use.
--Dan
www.prairienet.org/~dsb/
On Jan 2, 6:40 pm, ····@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) wrote:
> Dan Bensen <··········@cyberspace.net> wrote:
> +---------------
> | Happy New Year everyone. I've been wondering, how many Lispers
> | use Lisp to make a living? If you do use Lisp, how much do you
> | use it? If not, what language or languages do you use?
> +---------------
>
> I use Lisp at work whenever I can get away with it, which isn't much:
> basically, just one steadily-accreting-ball-of-mud that's my user-mode
> hardware bringup/debugging tool [think mmap + peek/poke + a bunch of
> convenience functions], plus the occasional "script" or config/build
> tool or other meta-tool.
>
> Otherwise, it's all C for Linux/Unix daemon/kernel/driver/embedded code.
> [Plus a tiny bit of assembler, mostly x86, x86_64, & ARM].
>
> -Rob
>
> p.s. In my non-work life [yes, there *is* a smidgin of one] I use Lisp
> in several web application servers, and for almost all coding I do
> "for myself", e.g., mail filters/daemons, sysadmin "scripts", etc.
> [And if I ever start a blog, it'll be in Lisp, too.]
>
> -----
> Rob Warnock <····@rpw3.org>
> 627 26th Avenue <URL:http://rpw3.org/>
> San Mateo, CA 94403 (650)572-2607
I sort-of follow that. I use ITT Visual's IDL and intel Fortran for
data analysis and simulation. My first (&rudimentary) use of Lisp was
to create a geometry of a recursive network pattern for a piece of
machinery at work. I then wrote a bit of lisp to dump this goemetry
in xfig format. And, sadly, I got hooked :-)
Since then I have been on the lookout for what to use Lisp next -- I
am starting to get desparate :-) I think my next foray will be to to
try to get nlisp installed and see if I can use that instead of IDL
for my simple simulation and data analysis tasks. (I've looked into
Lush, and while I appreciate the tremendous amoutn of work that its
authors have invested in it, it seems to be based on an old version of
Lisp. I would prefer to stay current and use a numerics package that
is built on top of the current lisp)
Mirko
On Jan 2, 8:58 am, Dan Bensen <··········@cyberspace.net> wrote:
> Happy New Year everyone. I've been wondering, how many Lispers
> use Lisp to make a living?
Well, I'm a physicist, but I do a lot of my work in Common Lisp. I
need to run Monte Carlo simulations, and for my particular problem
domain, I could easily live with the modest loss in efficiency that
comes from not using C (or Fortran) in return for the flexibility and
ease of development that comes from using CL. I say "could" because
the aforementioned flexibility and ease has actually allowed me to
improve efficiency by using more appropriate data structures and
algorithms.
Cheers,
Pillsy
Dan Bensen <··········@cyberspace.net> writes:
> use it? If not, what language or languages do you use? How much
Mostly VHDL, SystemVerilog and Verilog. But I write most of my utility
programs using Common Lisp. I really would like to make a Common Lisp
based HDL one day, and a synthesis tool to translate the CL-HDL into
EDIF...
Petter
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
Petter Gustad wrote:
> Dan Bensen <··········@cyberspace.net> writes:
>
>> use it? If not, what language or languages do you use? How much
>
> Mostly VHDL, SystemVerilog and Verilog. But I write most of my utility
> programs using Common Lisp. I really would like to make a Common Lisp
> based HDL one day, and a synthesis tool to translate the CL-HDL into
> EDIF...
I write C++ for pay but I use Common Lisp as often as I can find an
excuse to do so. Whenever I need to cough out a "script" for some
one-off task, I use CL when I would've used Perl in the past. Being an
Emacs user, I find that having SLIME makes getting to Lisp almost
completely seamless. I tend to have one Emacs process with easily a
hundred buffers open at a time, including shells, etc. It's funny how
I'll find myself occasionally typing Lisp into a shell buffer if I
momentarily forget what buffer I'm in. Having recently started using
CLSQL, I now use Lisp for lots of little DB tasks, too.
On Jan 2, 8:58 am, Dan Bensen <··········@cyberspace.net> wrote:
> Happy New Year everyone. I've been wondering, how many Lispers
> use Lisp to make a living? If you do use Lisp, how much do you
> use it? If not, what language or languages do you use? How much
> of an uberhacker does one have to be to make a living with Lisp?
> And if one isn't quite that accomplished, what are marketable
> alternatives that are better than Java and C++?
>
> --
> Danwww.prairienet.org/~dsb/
I don't use Lisp to make a living, as such - but I do use it in my
job. I'm a UNIX hacker at an ISP. I create a lot of robots to automate
or monitor stuff for me - for small stuff I use the Bourne Shell. For
anything else, where some people might use Perl - I use SBCL. I get
away with it because I'm good, and Lisp makes me great. And six months
later I can return to my code and instantly see what I was doing.
The market for Lisp jobs may be small, but the market for Lisp
solutions is larger.
-M
In article <············@wildfire.prairienet.org> Dan
Bensen<··········@cyberspace.net> wrote:
> Happy New Year everyone. I've been wondering, how many Lispers
> use Lisp to make a living? If you do use Lisp, how much do you
> use it? If not, what language or languages do you use? How much
> of an uberhacker does one have to be to make a living with Lisp?
> And if one isn't quite that accomplished, what are
> marketablealternatives that are better than Java and C++?
C++ is the main language here (I work for game developer)
But we do use lots of other languages:
Makefiles (mostly GNU make compatible)
Batchfiles -- The venerable
UNIX Scripts -- Actually running under Cygwin - rarely used
Perl -- higher batch filing :)
Python -- Maya has python, Motion Builder too.
Maya MEL -- TCL like Maya script, not bad :)
Max Script -- Never used it, but have coworkers that dd
(Inline) assembly -- Less and less used, but there are still places
where it is Various internal script languages that drive the games,
and others that define various data structures (XML-like, or sometimes
just XML)
I have used Common Lisp for some little tools of mine, one was going
through the whole source base, and was automatically adding some
debugging stuff to all *.cpp files (or removing it). It was basically
setting up profiling points. The other tool was doing some parsing job.
--
I'm trying a new usenet client for Mac, Nemo OS X.
You can download it at http://www.malcom-mac.com/nemo
Funny I forgot .NET - We do use VB.NET and C#
In fact those languages may become even more used in future.
Our top game designers are used to VB.NET and write tools themselves,
while C# is being used more and more tool-side.
> In article <············@wildfire.prairienet.org> Dan
> Bensen<··········@cyberspace.net> wrote:
>> Happy New Year everyone. I've been wondering, how many Lispers
>> use Lisp to make a living? If you do use Lisp, how much do you
>> use it? If not, what language or languages do you use? How much
>> of an uberhacker does one have to be to make a living with Lisp?
>> And if one isn't quite that accomplished, what are
>> marketablealternatives that are better than Java and C++?
> C++ is the main language here (I work for game developer)
> But we do use lots of other languages:
> Makefiles (mostly GNU make compatible)
> Batchfiles -- The venerable
> UNIX Scripts -- Actually running under Cygwin - rarely used
> Perl -- higher batch filing :)
> Python -- Maya has python, Motion Builder too.
> Maya MEL -- TCL like Maya script, not bad :)
> Max Script -- Never used it, but have coworkers that dd
> (Inline) assembly -- Less and less used, but there are still places
> where it is Various internal script languages that drive the games,
> and others that define various data structures (XML-like, or
> sometimesjust XML)
> I have used Common Lisp for some little tools of mine, one was going
> through the whole source base, and was automatically adding some
> debugging stuff to all *.cpp files (or removing it). It was basically
> setting up profiling points. The other tool was doing some parsing
> job.
--
I'm trying a new usenet client for Mac, Nemo OS X.
You can download it at http://www.malcom-mac.com/nemo
Dan Bensen wrote:
> Happy New Year everyone. I've been wondering, how many Lispers
> use Lisp to make a living? If you do use Lisp, how much do you
> use it?
I do bioinformatics in an academic setting, and I use Common Lisp
(Allegro Enterprise, to be precise) for virtually all of my code.
Alberto