@akjcv@types.pl “Finally, a Lisp compiler that does what it should...”
“It […] contains many known bugs. Not everything is fully implemented.”
maybe a little too on-the-nose…
@Lady @akjcv@types.pl apparently what a lisp compiler “should” do is throw out essential features of the language standardized. ok
@aescling @akjcv@types.pl evidence that javascript is just a weird lisp grows
@Lady @akjcv@types.pl i mean in fairness i would purrobably be fine with a lisp and a js without any eval
@aescling @akjcv@types.pl oh i was talking about proper tail calls (only implemented in Safari), Symbol.species (trying to be removed by Chromium), and all the stuff TypeScript implicitly leaves out in order to be remotely sensible as a language
@aescling @akjcv@types.pl javascript isn’t actually a Lisp because code you write today on your machine will work tomorrow on someone else’s, but the fact remains that most of the people writing Javascript compilers and optimizers actually hate core features of the language
