Well judging from the description, "native" actually means writing it in RPython (a "restricted" Python with types for use in the PyPy Project for static analysis and speeding things up[0]) and then compiling it down using PyPy (I am guessing on the second part). That could be neat, the HyLang people (Lisp written in vanilla CPython Python; I think no C extensions AFAIK).
Hy isn't a full Lisp interpreter in Python, it's an s-expression to Python AST parser, which means it does everything Python does (including C extensions) at essentially native speed anyway - you can even write RPython in it.
If you ask me, full Python interop makes Hy the most practical s-expression language today.
One problem with Hy for me is that it keeps Python scoping, either global or function; that doesn't feel natural to me in a Lisp, and it gets in my way. If it weren't for that and a few similar matters, I'd agree with you on Hy's practicality; as it is, I'd give my nod to Clojure.
The snark wasn't necessary indeed, and as an early-stage project, lacking documentation is understandable.
As an HN post however, if you tease us with "magical features" in the title, I'd expect to have the magic shown to me in the linked page, or at the very least in the top comment. I shouldn't have to grok the sources to figure it out.
Thanks, i already noticed the age of the project :). The ""complaint"" is obviously valid, i'd add at least half a page of examples to explain what it does and how to try it, just to increase the chance of contribution.
No snarkiness was intended... but looks like it came out that way.
I didn't take your use of “documentation” to be so loose, but I agree that it should have an explanation for the use of “magical” in the title. The author has since added an explanation.
