As an interviewer, you do not have the elevated role necessary to determine if your method of interview results in better candidates, especially since you didn’t try any alternatives beyond an automated code submission. This is intellectual dishonesty that serves to shelter the author from thinking critically about the affects their actions actually have.
Is there a reason you want to start with lisp? If you’re like, intellectually incapable of complex languages, the simple one I’m familiar with is python, which works great for a beginner who doesn’t want to get into the nitty gritty of implementation. As long as you’re not developing for a business or similar, I doubt you’ll even notice there is an efficiency difference. IMO, the increased readability is tantamount to Python’s usefulness to newbies.
I don’t use C++ and I complain about it all the time. Never have I had a project that couldn’t be completed in equal or better accuracy in something other than C++, and the amount of development time it adds on just to use the damn thing is prohibitive. Let alone fast compilation for iterative design, or reduction in boilerplate. I feel the only thing C++ has is seniority and a smidgen of performance, and performance is rapidly being approached or exceeded by projects like rust.
I think there are two types of programming languages:
Good ones that are expressive and readable, like you need from a language.
And
Things that sorely need replacement.
Sorry, I just really fucking hate that quote. It’s so pretentious and stupid, and doesn’t allow for the development of anything new unless people don’t like it. Programmers are surprisingly conservative.
I can legally destroy my own private property thank you very much