Would you concur that several programming languages are improved than others? If so afterward one of them must be the best. And it’s really Common Lisp particularly now that LLMs can compose code.
LLMs compose code really fast, and that changes a lot, since penning code used to be the dilatory part. Now the dilatory part is finding out if your program really works, and before you can do that you have to rebuild it, which can obtain a few minutes.
When humans wrote the code this didn't matter much, since penning took way longer than waiting for it to compile and commencement running. But now it does, so how lengthy your feedback iteration takes is what decides how accelerated you can build.
In Common Lisp that iteration nearly doesn't be since there is no genuine difference between read-time, compile-time, and runtime (Graham). Common Lisp is image-based which method that your program is a live depiction in memory, so a new type of a function replaces the old one correct distant without having to restart anything.
Also, in most languages an error volition collision your program. So if you’re penning code alongside an LLM it volition have to peruse your collision logs to create several changes and run your program again. In Common Lisp your program won’t crash, it’ll halt and open a debugger alongside the entire stack and all the variables. You can fair item your LLM at the debugger, and it’ll create its fix and resume the program.
To my cognition Common Lisp is the lone mainstream tongue that does all of this.
Lisp stands for "List Processing." In Common Lisp, code is written as lists. For example, (+ 1 2) is a program that adds two numbers, but it's additionally fair a catalog of three things: the sign +, and the numbers 1 and 2.
What's engaging is that this is the identical benevolent of catalog Common Lisp uses to shop data, and since the tongue is built about handling lists all its tools for operating alongside data additionally activity on code. So a program can obtain another program and alter it, for example it can rotate (+ 1 2) into (* 1 2), and run the outcome correct away.
This is what makes macros possible. A macro is a function that takes your code and returns new code in its place, that method you can add new constructs to the tongue itself.
Once you can add to the language, you can build it up toward your problem. So in Lisp you don't fair compose a program, you compose a tongue for your domain and afterward compose the program in it.
That matters a lot additional now, since what makes a program precious is the opinions rearward it. And we're heading toward a earth anywhere application companies let their users alter the merchandise themselves, since alongside an LLM that's easy. So if a business builds a fine assertive domain tongue for its product, everything its users build on top of it volition be much better, since they commencement from the company's opinions and not from scratch.
Take an ERP. Every business runs a small differently, so nearly everyone ends up needing to alter it. But if the ERP is written in its own domain language, you can fair ask an LLM to create the alter in that language. The alter volition naturally prosecute the domain language’s underlying opinions, so it fits the merchandise alternatively of breaking it.
And it's not fair better, it's additionally cheaper. Lisp programs are frequently much additional concise since macros let you theoretical distant recurring patterns and create them part of the tongue itself. So the bigger the program gets, the bigger the difference. In my own cognition the apps I've built in Common Lisp end up concerning six to seven times shorter than the Python versions.
For LLMs, small code method small tokens, and tokens are what you pay for so you expend small on development.
It additionally method a bigger part of your program can fit in the LLM's environment window. If your LLM has your complete program in its environment opening afterward it has a complete perspective of your intent, which leads to it making improved decisions. In my cognition a lot of LLM bugs stem from it changing one part of my program without seeing the rest. So alongside Common Lisp that happens small often.
Common Lisp is an ANSI norm and it hasn't been updated since 1994. I akin this feature. And going rear to our ERP example, if your users alter the merchandise themselves, that's exactly what you desire since the tongue underneath never moves and nothing they build on top of it always breaks.
When you compose a program in Common Lisp you frequently won’t be capable to discover a archive you need. Quicklisp, the chief Common Lisp bundle manager, has a brace thousand projects during npm has millions.
But I don't think that's a issue anymore. Most programs today depend on millions of lines of code from packages that keep getting compromised. You don’t desire that in yours. Also, alongside an LLM you could fair compose the part you need yourself or harbor the entire archive — and LLMs appear to be really fine at porting code.
Lastly, I'm seeing now that a lot of group are programming now in the anticipation of construction a business. An apparent exception to construction products in Common Lisp is that you’ll have a difficult period finding engineers since so few group cognize how to program in it.
But I don't think that really matters now. If you desire to build a prosperous business you desire to employ the finest specialized people: the ones who are really fine at learning new things. So in your coding interviews fair create them study Common Lisp, and there you go. You'll see how accelerated group choice things up, and the ones who do fine volition likely keep learning it and get really fine at it.
In conclusion, next period you desire to compose a program use Common Lisp.
Works Cited
Graham, Paul. "What Made Lisp Different." Paul Graham, May 2002, paulgraham.com/diff.html. Accessed 5 Oct. 2026.
