You can make embarrassing mistakes in virtually any programming language that’s not too esoteric.

When I still used Python for prototyping (today, I usually use Go for that), it happened much too often that I did this:

if foo:
    bar()
   foobar() # syntax error

In Lisp, however, both errors are much harder to make (not even considering GNU Emacs’s superb auto-indentation - which is what most Lispers use these days, as far as I know):

(when foo)  ;; <- obvious!
    (bar))

(when foo
    (bar)
          (foobar)  ;; <- still valid
(quux))  ;; <- also still valid

Dynamic typing is the source of very amazing errors, see JavaScript.

Feel free, it’s still out there!

I still write more Perl than Python these days.

Still easier to refactor than Python. ;-)

For all of those, Lisp is the more logical choice. Plus, whitespace as syntax is the worst possible design decision.

Lol, as if we had any money to invest.

deleted by creator

Wait until you see the Lisp community. But yes, Rust is currently in its “why are there even any other languages lol” phase. Just wait.

Friends don’t let friends use a dark mode.

I understand the reluctance but it feels to me like arguing “we should just stick with COBOL because it works.”

For those depending on COBOL code that does the job and has been doing it just well for a few decades, there are approximately zero good reasons to not stick with it.

Ha, I’ll steal that! “Karen compiler” - quite fitting, to be honest.

even though Rust is objectively better.

In some of its characteristics, Rust is certainly a good language. The borrow checker, however, still haunts my restless dreams today.

A mac would be a nightmare, in the worst case it “would just work”. Unacceptable.

That sounds exactly like the reason why Linux behaves like it does. ;-)

Sounds like you should get a Mac.

Be that as it may, I would like to be constructive for a change:

Why does every distro need yet another package manager? Yay/pacman I get because it seems to build it. Though I don’t understand why, other than AUR. APT is so nice and easy… I hope DNF is the same.

RPM - which DNF uses - is the standard package format for Linux ;-) The problem seems to me to be that every distribution does not attach any importance to something like common standards.

1. A C64, I believe.
2. Turbo Pascal… or whatever their IDE was called.
3. Turbo Pascal… or whatever the language was called. :-) (But I’m not entirely sure whether QBasic had beaten it by a week-or-so anymore.)
4. Roughly, 20 years. I (kind of) regret that.
5. Common Lisp, if we don’t accept Python as a Lisp.
6. GNU Emacs, mostly.
7. Rust and Go, but that’s mostly because Common Lisp still lacks a good integrated compiler/package manager/project management system that doesn’t start with “install Quicklisp, then…”. Roswell just does not work on most systems on which I had tried it.
8. Common Lisp.

That’s not too hard, given that NetBSD is a niche in a niche. But a permanent Plan 9 server account which I do not have to keep running sounds intriguing… thank you!

What happens with the Plan 9 system after the boot camp has ended? From what I can see on that site, their Plan 9 shenanigans will end by mid-September. (SDF is NetBSD-centric AFAIK.)

Venti/Fossil are awesome for a Plan 9 network. Sadly, the world isn’t Plan 9. TIL about gefs though.

I wish someone would port Python and BorgBackup to it. Venti/Fossil are not quite as nice for multi-OS backups.