From Qi's designer, Mark Tarver<p>"Why I am Not a Professor
OR
The Decline and Fall of the British University"<p><a href="http://www.lambdassociates.org/blog/decline.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.lambdassociates.org/blog/decline.htm</a>
It sounds to be wasting a lot of time proving things about programming, when the spirit of Lisp is usually much more test-driven and not proving things. The stated goal is so that you can go about your normal business, but PROVABLY! I'd say this is much more in the spirit of ML than the spirit of Lisp.
I don't like the case-sensitive symbols. Nor do I like the implicit quote on symbols...it doesn't make much sense to me but that might because there aren't many good code samples on the site.<p>Is it too much to ask for a nice looking website with lots of good code samples? And a reference link for all the functions that work in the language would be nice.<p>As much as some people dislike newLISP, it at least has a good clear/concise website: <a href="http://newlisp.org/" rel="nofollow">http://newlisp.org/</a> The purpose is clearly stated, and right away you know on what it can run and where to look for comparisons to other Lisps.<p>Not much of a competitor to Arc in my opinion. But pg, please show us some more Arc code :P
Any competitor is a good thing. It will either cause Arc to move faster, or just be better than it. The pattern matching simplifications seem quite slick.
This comment was started as a thread here:<p><a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/comments?id=20012" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.com/comments?id=20012</a>