> I really don't get this hype about lisp-like languages.
Well for one thing some of us having been using Lisp for a very, very long time. I have personally been using it for years so it seems like the most natural thing to me at this point.
That is the historical element to Lisp. Of course, there are also practical advantages. The lisp-like languages are effectively the only class of languages available today that allow you to effective escape from text-based programming and use certain advanced techniques that are necessary for symbolic AI.
> Others (including Common Lisp) are just too complex for writing in them ASTs (yes, S-expression is AST...).
This part of your comment leaves much to be desired. How is Common Lisp complex and exactly what other languages share this feature? What does this have to do with "writing them ASTs"? Finally, please explain why you equate S-expressions with ASTs.
Well for one thing some of us having been using Lisp for a very, very long time. I have personally been using it for years so it seems like the most natural thing to me at this point.
That is the historical element to Lisp. Of course, there are also practical advantages. The lisp-like languages are effectively the only class of languages available today that allow you to effective escape from text-based programming and use certain advanced techniques that are necessary for symbolic AI.
> Others (including Common Lisp) are just too complex for writing in them ASTs (yes, S-expression is AST...).
This part of your comment leaves much to be desired. How is Common Lisp complex and exactly what other languages share this feature? What does this have to do with "writing them ASTs"? Finally, please explain why you equate S-expressions with ASTs.