For me t would probably either be smalltalk or forth.
ML, J, Agda.
I think of Standard ML as a kind-of "Scheme for production", so there's that. Beyond that, there are languages better for some domains, like APL for math.. And I like D for low-level bit banging, but this kind of work is intrinsically slow so best kept to a minimum.
>>2,3
Me too. I would also give ATS a try instead of D.
Standard ML and OCaml, instead of Scheme and Common Lisp.
I think of Standard ML as a kind-of "Scheme for production" ...
How so? The amount of Standard ML in production is likely to be far less than that of Scheme.
By the way, which Standard ML implementation do you use?
I'd use those other languages I already use: Ada and APL.
Perhaps I'd also use Smalltalk, in such a case.
>>6
Are we talking about those times when Scheme (should) have just appeared?
Whatever big boss man pays me to use.
For "in production" I didn't mean lines of code, just my personal feelings. I think the SML feature set is more suitable for programs/services with quality/security requirements (like Internet servers). On the other hand, I still like Lisps for prototyping because of the dynamic typing and homoiconicity. Pick the best tool for the job ...
I like Poly/ML. It runs on my Mac M1, supports threads, FFI & compiles to native code. As well as the libraries mentioned on Poly/ML's Web site I find useful stuff in smackage and https://github.com/MLTon/mltonlib (e.g. use-lib for building, contract.sig/sml for design-by-contract).
Unfortunately, this is only for play/personal research now, as >>9 mentioned I get paid for C & Python :-(. But I'm wondering about a side project ...
Toki Pona
When I started programming, I started with Batch scripts Java but I couldn't wrap my head around OOP, so I decided to switch the language. I picked Python. I wish I had known about Ruby and learned it instead, since it's basically a better Python. The Python2-Python3 split still hurts Python even to this day (some tutorials/books are obsolete, for example). The whitespace-based syntax of Python is not sane. The way Python does OOP sucks (just use Ruby). Ruby also has better REPL.
Forth
Forth is too minimal for me.
I would probably use Smalltalk (Pharo/Squeak) or Tcl (someone made a good copypasta: https://paste.textboard.org/d186e4c2).
...or perhaps Perl 5 (it has PCRE, POD, CPAN, PerlMonks, Pledge/Unveil support on OpenBSD. If you are interested, see perldoc perltoc and the perlstyle man-page. I heard some people use the debugger as a "REPL" but there is https://metacpan.org/dist/Devel-REPL)
I guess I might look more into Ocaml and Lua, too (I know very little about the ML-family and Ocaml).
imo a language must have:
* sane syntax
* automatic memory management
* powerful debugging capabilities and a REPL.
* there must also be a FOSS implementation of the language.
>>12
Agree with Ruby and Tcl but they both lack libraries.
imo a language must have:
Dude, your list is far from complete.
hyper super duper perl
>>9
COBOL?
>>10
For less than 100€/hr or 1,872,000€+100%EAPR(2022)?
found out OP made this thread in response to
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30811592
>>12
If you like Ruby, look at Elixir. The message-passing/process model is really nice to work with, and because it compiles to the same VM as Erlang you can use Erlang libraries natively.
>>16 Actually no I didn't read this post before, it just came to my mind what I would be writing code in if Lisp didn't exist at all so I decided to ask other Lisp developers what they would do.
JavaScript and Elixir
Haskell. I would use it if Lisp did exist, too.