Probably one of the best written ones: http://journal.stuffwithstuff.com/2013/07/18/javascript-isnt...
But basically, ask anyone with Lisp experience. Only JavaScript people without Lisp experience argue that JavaScript is Lispy.
But basically, ask anyone with Lisp experience. Only JavaScript people without Lisp experience argue that JavaScript is Lispy.
Most of my recent web development work has been all frontend, with the server-side integration as lightweight and generic as possible and Javascript to do everything else, not so much because that's necessarily an ideal way to do it as because Javascript is so much more expressive, and less painful to work in, than any of the server-side options of which I'm permitted to avail myself -- PHP and Perl, basically, with a strong institutional preference for the former, because apparently being able to pick any of a hundred random idiots off the street and have them write code for you is a benefit? A low barrier to entry is not, in this context, a good thing. (Granted, the same can be said of Javascript, but there's a qualitative difference in that Javascript at least makes it possible to write good code.)
as for your second remark, uh... Douglas Crockford?
What you should take from that assertion is "Javascript is more functional than imperative" (which is correct) and not "Javascript is lispy" (which is not).
[1] http://hop.perl.plover.com
[2] Perl is much more like Lisp than it is like C (from Preface)
[3] ... the book "Paradigms of Artificial Intelligence Programming", by Peter Norvig, includes a section titled "What Makes Lisp Different?" that describes seven features of Lisp. Perl shares six of these features; C shares none of them. These are big, important features, features like first-class functions, dynamic access to the symbol table, and automatic storage management. (also from Preface)