A Road to Common Lisp (2018)

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Language design, dependencies, and extensibility

  • Commenters argue it’s not contradictory that CL both avoids “dependency hell” and is highly extensible via libraries.
  • The large standard, backward compatibility, package system, and stable libraries mean fewer external deps are needed.
  • Extensibility comes from powerful libraries and macros that can add major features (e.g., CLOS, LOOP) without endless small dependencies.

REPL and interactive development

  • Many contrast Lisp’s REPL with typical “interpreter consoles” (Python, Ruby, R).
  • In CL, the REPL is the running system: you can inspect, redefine functions, change classes and instances, and resume execution in place.
  • Debuggers are REPLs at error points; you can patch code and continue without restarting or recreating state.
  • This is linked to late binding, resident compiler/debugger, and image-based workflows, not just “having a prompt.”

Tooling and editors

  • A recurring pain point is dependence on Emacs/SLIME for the full interactive experience; some users dislike Emacs.
  • Others suggest Doom Emacs / Evil, Spacemacs, Lem, Vim+SLIMV/Conjure, Atom/Pulsar, VSCode (alive-lsp), JetBrains, Jupyter, and browser-based tools like CLOG as alternatives.
  • Some report happily using plain Vim + tmux + REPL; others say the Emacs-based workflow is still uniquely powerful.

Libraries, JSON, and ecosystem

  • Opinions on JSON in CL differ: some see it as a “mess,” others say choosing one library works fine in practice.
  • A newer library, jzon, is mentioned as a de facto standardizing choice.
  • The broader ecosystem is described as richer than many assume, with curated lists and newer projects (web, GUIs, CL-on-LLVM, actors, ML-on-CL, etc.).

Use cases, deployment, and binaries

  • Reported uses include web backends, CLIs, numerical prototyping, games, quantum computing tooling, and Maxima.
  • CL is praised for stable, interactive development and for delivering standalone binaries (e.g., SBCL images), though sizes and toolchains vary.
  • Some prefer other languages (Elixir/Erlang, Rust, C, Racket) for their domains or “batteries-included” feel.

Popularity and learning value

  • Multiple comments ask why Lisp isn’t widespread if it’s so good.
  • Replies emphasize that “best” and “popular” are orthogonal; Lisp’s ideas (homoiconicity, macros) are seen as enduringly valuable even if niche.
  • There’s enthusiasm for Lisp as a way to rethink programming, but also recognition of small community, unfamiliar syntax, and editor friction as barriers.