"Well, okay, there was the discussion the other day that C compilers can pull out loop invariants and other things. I wonder if we can just do this through codewalkers, macros and Coalton/CLTL2."

holy shit I really hate it in CL implementation can we get On the expressive power of programming languages for optimisations, you absolutely cannot do that through local macros

Google doesn't give me a rate for retrofitting junk to SBCL for their deeds, youse are ridiculous, I'm over it.

"And unless someone were to tell or convince me that a better compiler than SBCL can be written and streamlined in under a 1000 hours, I'm probably going to use my 300 hours [/year usable on Lisp work] to make-do with whatever we already have."

everyone else thanks you for them having to waste their 300 hours kludging for bad compilers, can I get mine back while we're at it

If Mark Miller didn't blow the name on some whining this would be very excellently titled "tragedy of the Common Lisp".

@hayley

regarding this https://erights.medium.com/the-tragedy-of-the-common-lisp-why-large-languages-explode-4e83096239b9 to be fair, C++ is a large and complex language but it keeps growing. Also Java has new features, and/or more dialects like Kotlin.

Common Lisp can grow as libraries, DSL and macros (because it is an extensible language), but its specification is stable and immutable. It is a mature and usable language, without the needing to add other things.