Subject: Re: free lisp compilers?
From: Erik Naggum <>
Date: 1999/09/03
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>

* Bagheera, the jungle scout <>
| Anything you can do in lisp, I can do in C++.

  sure, but I think people generally expect you to do it in finite time.

| So I am at an empasse.  I want an affordable lisp compiler for Windows,
| or an INTELLIGENT explanation of why it is worth what companies charge
| for it (on average, it is about 3x the cost of a GOOD professional C++
| compiler).

  well, assume most companies pay their programmers a lot of money.  if you
  could save 50% on the time it took to complete a project, that'd be worth
  half a lot of money, which equals _way_ more than the difference between
  the cost of the compilers.

  the reason most managers don't believe it is that they don't actually
  know what their programmers spend their time on or that it could be spent
  much more wisely.  incidentally, doubling he programmer efficiency is
  considered weak performance, but it's what you'll get for the first
  project or two.  with very experienced programmers in both C++ and Lisp,
  you get a factor of 3 to 5 improvement in Lisp's favor, but with people
  who have spent a year learning their respective language, you should
  expect a factor 5 to 10 improvement in Lisp's favor.  the irony is that
  it's harder to find very experienced C++ programmers than to find very
  experienced Lisp programmers, and they cost a _lot_ more.

  also, a single good Lisp programmer can easily do more than 20 moderately
  good C++ programmers in the same time.  the reason is team communication
  overhead, which is necessary because doing C++ stuff all alone is too
  hard, and you also need to finish in reasonable amount of time.  that's
  why you don't see a lot of advertising for Lisp folks, but a whole lot of
  advertising for C++ folks.

  save the children: just say NO to sex with pro-lifers