|XP is just a number|
Lisp can be boiled down to a small set of Beautiful Rules, but do you know anybody who solves any problems with it?
Orbitz and Yahoo! Stores (formerly ViaWeb) both use Lisp for their software, or, at a minimum, they used to.
I've been reading Hackers and Painters by Paul Graham and will probably post a review of it when I'm done. Only 2 more chapters to go!
The book is a bit preachy in points but is overall a good read. He's very heavily biased towards lisp as the best tool for the job - any job. He was adamant enough that I've started learning it myself.
One of the points he raised in one of the chapters was that he paid attention to the languages his competition was using. If somebody showed up using Java or C or the like he wouldn't worry at all, dismissing them as suits that would fail. If he found out a potential competitor was using Perl or Python or the like, he'd start to lose sleep about it. They were using a language that allowed for more nimble development and most likely chose it because they knew what they were doing. He said that he would have probably wet himself if he found out a competitor was using lisp.
The point he was making was that languages started off with two very distinct paradigms - machine language and lisp. And the machine language side (progressing through Assembly and C and Perl and Ruby and such) is skewing leaning more towards lisp-ish things that've been around for decades anyway. So if everything else is becoming more lisp-ish, why not just use lisp?
Now, mind you, I'm not going to abandon perl for lisp any time soon, no matter how cool it may be (I didn't abandon perl for objective-c either, and that language is also terribly cool), but I am finally curious enough to see what the hype is about. If nothing else, looking at other languages gives me ideas and concepts to bring back and use in Perl.
I don't care about beautiful rules or number of lines, I care about beautiful solutions and beautiful software. Perl, properly done, really excels at that.