> Stepping back to the original point, there are other significantly important/powerful ideas in the world, and lisp users are somewhat over-the-top in their significance-to-hype ratio.
Lisp is not a version of lambda calculus. It's a programming language. Macro programming in Lisp works fine in many cases.
> type theory does better ... not the role of type systems in the world of practical software development).
Right, okay, so lisp is primarily a programming language for practical software development. That's really my whole point.
I'd argue that there are lots of other settings with ideas a powerful or more powerful than whatever it is each individual evangelist feels someone should get out a lisp. Yet none of these other things have enlightened evangelists pushing the product.
Lisp is not a version of lambda calculus. It's a programming language. Macro programming in Lisp works fine in many cases.
> type theory does better ... not the role of type systems in the world of practical software development).
Lisp is about practical software development.