Lisp is the obvious technically superior option for the web browser: rather than having three languages (HTML, CSS, and JS), you'd have one language: Lisp.
This would mean that things like SASS and HTML templates would be unnecessary: the HTML and CSS would be generated by Lisp macros, so you could use variables and other things.
Such a system would be incredibly elegant and would immediately solve lots of problems that HTML, CSS, and JS have. The reason why such a system hasn't been developed has little to do with technical reasons, but has to do with social reasons.
Most people don't make decisions based on whether it's a good idea or not, but based primarily upon what other people think. Most people play a power game involving reputation, honor, domination, putting other people down, raising their own ego, etc.
In such a world, these people see no gain in Lisp because it doesn't confer them any advantage in the power game they play, and HTML+CSS+JS already exists, so they prefer that.
In addition, these people believe that familiarity is the same thing as readability, thus because people are used to the status quo, they think that makes the status quo better. These people prefer to not take risks: they prefer inferior strategies that are normal compared to superior strategies that are unknown.
And from a more practical standpoint, if you're a boss of a company, it's much easier to find people who know HTML+CSS+JS than people who know Lisp.
Thus, the popular options remain popular, and the impopular options remain impopular, regardless of technical superiority or inferiority. This is true in almost all areas of our society, not just programming.
On a related note... even though we're stuck with the HTML+CSS+JS mess for the foreseeable future, there is the possibility of designing a Lisp that compiles down to JS. My own language Nulan is such a project. This would let you write Lispish code that executes very fast in the browser.
We also have ClojureScript, which is basically Clojure that compiles to Javascript: Lisp for the web browser. It combines the power of Clojure with Google's Closure web development library to spit out tight Javascript without any of the bad parts.
It's still not fully baked, but it's getting there. Clojure Lisp for web client development on top of Clojure on the desktop and server - my cup of Lisp doth brimmeth over.
I looked at ClojureScript at the source and perhaps I am wrong, but I like the simplicity of Arc and his approach.
But it is fine that others also go into this direction.
I think the difference is that to run an Arc powered website, you would need an Arc box on the server side, which is what you would need for running Clojure websites as well. What ClojureScript does is generate and compile the necessary JavaScript which can be off-loaded onto any (or at least most) web hosting sites, including shared web hosts. Additionally, the use of compiled JavaScript gives you the benefit of leveraging client-side processing, as opposed to Arc or Clojure boxes which are server-side solutions.
But you are right, Arc is great too, and it ultimately boils down to individual choice. Arc is my first Lisp, and I like it above Scheme/Common Lisp, as well as Python and Ruby.
But what if we not look at others and do our own. If somebody wants not to learn lisp and or see it advantages or decide to say in pride what make people blind.
My trainer said to me:
"What others do is NOT your problem. Do not judge."
So what if Lisp (Arc) never gets popular,
why is this a problem?
I am seeking for years for a better way of user interfaces
and one things for me is also the programming language as programming user of the computer.
