4 ms·

Writing a Lisp Interpreter in Go

34 points by fogus 17y ago

stcredzero 17y ago
I wrote a quip awhile back about wanting a scripting language closely integrated with Go. Maybe this would fit the bill? (Though one with a Go-like syntax would be better.)
- koenigdavidmj 17y ago
  That somewhat points to a development environment that I would like---a statically compiled language that is also easily interpreted. You develop with the interpreted version to get the quickest turnaround, and then you compile it for speed when you're ready to release your product. Seems like LLVM or the JVM would both make this comfortable.
  - stcredzero 17y ago
    You should check out Groovy then. It has optional typing. Put in enough type annotations, and it's compiled Java.
andrewcooke 17y ago
Curious. It implies tail call elimination (the description of exhausting the stack explicitly says it wasn't a tail recursive call), but the description sounds like it's so direct that I can't see how it works. Looking at evalExpr - http://github.com/bobappleyard/golisp/blob/master/lisp/lisp.go#L417 http://github.com/bobappleyard/golisp/blob/master/lisp/lisp.... - the only way I can see for this to have tail call elimination is if Go itself does (and I don't think it does, does it? It does have coroutines, which you could use to implement trampolining, but I don't see that here...)
- maxtilford 17y ago
  I think tail call elimination is handled in the Apply method for closures - http://github.com/bobappleyard/golisp/blob/master/lisp/lisp.go#L567 http://github.com/bobappleyard/golisp/blob/master/lisp/lisp.... . Looks like a trampoline to me.
  - andrewcooke 17y ago
    Ahhh. Thanks. After thinking about that I realised I don't understand Go's syntax :o)
alexk 17y ago
Can't but wait for go interpreter in lisp :)
- stcredzero 17y ago
  One that can compile its Lisp programs into Go.
ponce 17y ago
Now he can program in a proper language.
Semiapies 17y ago
Obligatory mention of having to use Readability for light-on-dark text... EDIT: Some of us are on the other side of 30 and won't waste our eyesight on a blog by someone who thought white-on-black was kewl. Those under 30 shouldn't, either.

34 points by fogus 17y ago

I wrote a quip awhile back about wanting a scripting language closely integrated with Go. Maybe this would fit the bill? (Though one with a Go-like syntax would be better.)

koenigdavidmj 17y ago
That somewhat points to a development environment that I would like---a statically compiled language that is also easily interpreted. You develop with the interpreted version to get the quickest turnaround, and then you compile it for speed when you're ready to release your product. Seems like LLVM or the JVM would both make this comfortable.
- stcredzero 17y ago
  You should check out Groovy then. It has optional typing. Put in enough type annotations, and it's compiled Java.

andrewcooke 17y ago

Curious. It implies tail call elimination (the description of exhausting the stack explicitly says it wasn't a tail recursive call), but the description sounds like it's so direct that I can't see how it works. Looking at evalExpr - http://github.com/bobappleyard/golisp/blob/master/lisp/lisp.go#L417 http://github.com/bobappleyard/golisp/blob/master/lisp/lisp.... - the only way I can see for this to have tail call elimination is if Go itself does (and I don't think it does, does it? It does have coroutines, which you could use to implement trampolining, but I don't see that here...)

maxtilford 17y ago
I think tail call elimination is handled in the Apply method for closures - http://github.com/bobappleyard/golisp/blob/master/lisp/lisp.go#L567 http://github.com/bobappleyard/golisp/blob/master/lisp/lisp.... . Looks like a trampoline to me.
- andrewcooke 17y ago
  Ahhh. Thanks. After thinking about that I realised I don't understand Go's syntax :o)

alexk 17y ago

Can't but wait for go interpreter in lisp :)

stcredzero 17y ago
One that can compile its Lisp programs into Go.

ponce 17y ago

Now he can program in a proper language.

Semiapies 17y ago

Obligatory mention of having to use Readability for light-on-dark text... EDIT: Some of us are on the other side of 30 and won't waste our eyesight on a blog by someone who thought white-on-black was kewl. Those under 30 shouldn't, either.