3 ms·
Agreed on the Windows thing. I tend to stay away from Cygwin. I like the new Picolisp site btw. The code on Rosetta code is terse, and uses slightly different i
by throwaway7645 10y ago
Agreed on the Windows thing. I tend to stay away from Cygwin. I like the new Picolisp site btw. The code on Rosetta code is terse, and uses slightly different idioms than I'm used to.
- jacobush 10y agoCome to think of it, some docker and other fancy container magic could also help adoption. And other such things people use nowadays. Maybe a nodejs integration? Stuff like that.
- throwaway7645 10y agoMy dream would be to just use something like Picolisp on Windows without the workarounds. Maybe that can be done via the new Bash on Windows10? Idk.
- jacobush 10y agoMust be possible with the new Ubuntu layer whatever its called. Edit: https://blogs.windows.com/buildingapps/2016/03/30/run-bash-on-ubuntu-on-windows/ https://blogs.windows.com/buildingapps/2016/03/30/run-bash-o... They say WSL apps can not interact directly with Windows apps. So yes and no to your question. I would say it would be similar to running in a virtual machine but more integrated.
- jacobush 10y agoCygwin is great for processing data and generally have a lot of tools one might be used to from Linux. But when targeting Windows, that is, creating a program FOR Windows, maybe for general distribution, cygwin feels very cumbersome to me. PicoLisp is MIT licensed and small, so could be an integral part of a Windows program. PicoLisp has promise on Windows, but someone would have to step up and maintain a Windows package for it. I have been daydreaming about it but I have too many half-finished projects under my belt to fool myself into starting that too.