LISP is shit

Bunch of fucking retrohipsters who shit on any language who dares to use imperative logic, and then use their awesum smelly macros to reimplement a IF statement in about 37 ways.

Then complain about MUH PERFORMAMCE and GEEEECEEE, while using linked lists all the way down.

How elegant is your shitty code, BTW? How many pseudo-syntax did you have to reinvent only to have a spaghetti of parens while barely having decent support for things as simple as lambdas (even Java have them now, and more readable than yours, how does that feel)? How its going your numeric code where you can never make sense the mathematical operations (oh wait, more shitty macros, because when you have homoiconicoticoifocity you don't need decent language constructs at all!)

How does it feel that the most popular LISP variant nowadays is actually only because it have compatibility with Java and it's pretty much Haskell with parens?

How does it feel clinging to a shitty book from the 80s which pretty much everyone ignores nowadays, since ALGOL-like languages are just easier and more natural for the majority of algorithms?

But please, keep using your parens and leave the real world programming to the people who know better. Keep dreading in the bowels of the internet, so nobody needs deal with your shitty "list processing".

We get it, it's a toy language. Do you not enjoy playing with toys for grown-ups? I do.

MUH

Please stop this, this is not an imagereddit.

>>2
Lisp is not a toy language.

>>1
You're objections are at most tangentially relevant to Liskell, which is now a dead dog. Your probably trolling anyway, as evidenced by the ignorance and confrontational attitude displayed in you're post.

Bunch of fucking retrohipsters who shit on any language who dares to use imperative logic, and then use their awesum smelly monads to reimplement a IF statement in about 37 ways.

Then complain about MUH PERFORMAMCE and GEEEECEEE, while using infinite lists all the way down.

How elegant is your shitty code, BTW? How many pseudo-syntax did you have to reinvent only to have a spaghetti of hyper operators while barely having decent support for things as simple as mutable data (even Java have them now, and more readable than yours, how does that feel)? How its going your numeric code where you can never make sense the mathematical operations (oh wait, more shitty category maps, because when you have categorifonicocity you don't need decent language constructs at all!)

How does it feel that the most popular Haskell variant nowadays is actually only because it have compatibility with Haskell and it's pretty much Haskell with more Haskell?

How does it feel clinging to a shitty book from the 80s which pretty much everyone ignores nowadays, since ALGOL-like languages are just easier and more natural for the majority of algorithms?

But please, keep using your monads and leave the real world programming to the people who know better. Keep dreading in the bowels of the internet, so nobody needs deal with your shitty "monad category functoring".

signed a lisper with a affectionate appreciation for haskell
forgotten language lovers unite!

Haskell is a bad idea done wrong.

Haskell is like a burrito: both are used in bad analogies.

I forgot I have shat this thread.

>>8

Ironic shitposting is still shitposting, at least I was genuine.

Seems like copypasta to me.

Seems like dubs to me.

LISP IS LIKE LIVING IN THE JETSONS, EVERYTHING IS RETRO BUT YOU GET A FLYING CAR

ALSO LAIN

If it ain't Lisp, it's shit.

>>1,5
Lisp and Haskell are both scams.

>>1
Lithpers don't shit on imperative logic. Only Haskell curries do. OP clearly hasn't written one line of Lithp in his life.

>>14
Scam my anus

>>4

you're

your

Lisp is the shit.