Yes. Almost the whole point of wanting a more expressive implementation language is so that you can more easily and directly implement a wider range of more restrictive, more declarative languages in it, AND to lower the friction of moving information into, out of and between those sublanguages. Thesis, antithesis, synthesis, five cents please. /thread.
That's a similar idea, but with more of a focus on a single organically home-grown Lisp environment to make your application easier to write and change.
I love this, by the way:
> Language and program evolve together. Like the border between two warring states, the boundary between language and program is drawn and redrawn, until eventually it comes to rest along the mountains and rivers, the natural frontiers of your problem. In the end your program will look as if the language had been designed for it. And when language and program fit one another well, you end up with code which is clear, small, and efficient.
