I think it's a combination of reasons: people aren't used to the syntax, so it turns some of them off from giving Lisp a try, Lisp machines didn't take off and their competition didn't have great Lisp support, when computers became more powerful and better suited for Lisp it was seen as older and not as hot as the new things like Perl and Java, and there's still the perception that because Emacs offers a truly first-class Lisp experience that other editors won't work so well for it.

And of course because of those various reasons the Lisp community is rather small so it creates the vicious cycle of 'the community is too small and there are no libraries so I won't use it' into 'there are too few people using it so there's a small community and less manpower to make various libraries'.

> if Lisp is so good, why isn’t its use more widespread?

There are over 39 thousand McDonald's restaurants worldwide, yet there's no general consensus on whether that's really good food. Opinions on McDonald's food vary. Some people enjoy it for its taste, convenience, and affordability, while others criticize it for its nutritional value and health impact.

Popular doesn't necessarily mean good, and vice-versa.

Consider classical music as another example. It's praised for its intricacy, artistry, and emotional richness, yet it lacks the widespread popularity of genres like pop or rock. I'm not a musician, but I believe any aspiring artist would gain immensely from studying classical music. Similarly, any programmer would find significant value in learning Lisp. The concept of Lisp is genuinely captivating (don't confuse it with Common Lisp, I'm talking about the general idea of Lisp, not a concrete implementation). Good ideas have enduring relevance. Much like classical music, which, though never mainstream, perpetually retains its allure, Lisp remains perpetually attractive, even if it never reclaims mainstream status.

The other way around: its use might be more widespread than one thinks, because it is still used in the industry, it is still chosen by new companies. https://github.com/azzamsa/awesome-lisp-companies/ (nothing official here) For instance, CL seems a corner stone for quantum computing these days.

Not saying it is widespread, of course.

And this comment is asked every time a Common Lisp submission comes up. Perhaps go and read prior answers?

> If Lisp is so good, why isn’t its use more widespread?

What does "good" and "widespread" have to do with each other? Mildly orthogonal concerns. As a tech junkie, one experience that has been consistent all my life is "the best stuff is almost never widespread". When I was in to digital cameras, the "best" camera was rarely the widespread one - both pre-DSLR and after. The best file management utility is not the widespread one. The best radio is not the widespread one. The best TV is not the widespread one. The best SW for a task is often not the most widespread one.

I know I'm not answering the question. Instead, I want you to ponder the faulty premise in your question. Instead of tying your question to "widespread", why not simply ask why people like Common Lisp so much?

It's like asking "If that job is so awesome, why doesn't it pay well?"

> Perhaps go and read prior answers

HN is not a knowledge base or docs. It’s a forum. Perhaps you should go and read the HN guidelines?

You're giving me absolutely terrible comp.lang.lisp flashbacks here.

Rumor has it that HN accs are ranked by mentions of Lisp, if you fall too low you risk 'problems' from The Powers That Be.

That and APL, yes.

I knew it, it's a conspiracy by Big Array.

and Big Cons. rivals joining forces against the rest of the world

People probably just find it interesting

The "Lisp Curse" is a concept suggesting that the power and flexibility of Lisp lead developers to endlessly customize their development environment rather than focusing on building end-user applications. While this notion has some anecdotal merit, implying that Lisp's versatility can sometimes divert focus, it's not a universal truth. Successful Lisp projects exist, and many developers thrive using it productively. The alleged "curse" is more a commentary on the potential for distraction with highly flexible tools, not a definitive outcome.

It's an essay, not an academic paper. The entire "Lisp Curse" essay can basically be counteracted with Big Lebowski's "Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man."