upvote
> Nothing about being non-homoiconic

Nothing about being statically/dynamically typed. Nothing about being functional/OOP/relational/logic. Nothing about being pure/side-effecty/strict/lazy. Nothing about being compiled/interpreted. Nothing about imperative/procedural/stack-oriented.

You can pick just about any single or (few) aspects about any language. Heck, it doesn't even have to be a programming language and you can find things to complain about.

You know that there are three genuine, true, legit ways to build robust, bug-free, performant software? Three! The problem? Nobody knows what they are and that's why we are all doomed to keep bashing on everyone else's choices and opinions.

"Better experience" is not dictated by "features". Better experience comes, well, with experience.

I suppose it's my own fault. I tried focusing on "holistic, overall experience", yet still picked a single aspect to chime in.

reply
Please do not take GP seriously. He is widely regarded in the emacs and lisp communities as an exuberant ignoramus.
reply
Huh? First time I hear that my account is "regarded" and not just, but "widely" too. What part of your fragile ego my words hurt, I wonder?
reply