Subject: Re: Lua (was Re: What would you do with 10 Man Years?)
From: (Rob Warnock)
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 02:28:20 -0600
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp,comp.lang.scheme
Message-ID: <>
Erann Gat <> wrote:
| "Brandon J. Van Every" <> wrote:
| > The idea that scripting has to be slow is a rather primitive
| > programmatic notion.  It will go away within 10 years.
| Actually, IMO the idea that scripting and programming are distinct in
| any way is a rather primitive notion and ought to go away.  But I'm not
| holding my breath.

I suspect the popularity of that idea has come from a common misreading
of Ousterhout's paper <URL:>,
which, when read closely, does *not* actually separate scripting and
programming at all; rather, it distinguishes scripting LANGUAGES from
"system programming" LANGUAGES. Even in the paper's abstract it's clear
that it's all programming.

Another thing that tends to get overlooked in reading that paper is the
comment on Lisp near the end, where he says:

    ...there are many interesting languages that can't be characterized
    cleanly as a system programming language or a scripting language.
    For example, the Lisp family of languages lies somewhere between
    scripting and system programming, with some of the attributes of
    each. Lisp pioneered concepts such as interpretation and dynamic
    typing that are now common in scripting languages, as well as
    automatic storage management and integrated development environments,
    which are now used in both scripting and system programming languages.

Personally, I've become quite happy using Common Lisp for "scripting",
particularly since, if there are some especially time-consuming functions,
it's so easy to compile them right there in the "script".

"Lisp: A scripting language with system programming language performance..."


Rob Warnock			<>
627 26th Avenue			<URL:>
San Mateo, CA 94403		(650)572-2607