3 ms·

Yes, I use SBCL daily. The fact that SBCL (like most CL implementations) is image-based makes CL the language for interactive and incremental programming and li

Yes, I use SBCL daily. The fact that SBCL (like most CL implementations) is image-based makes CL the language for interactive and incremental programming and live debugging the program as it runs. (Shameless plug: I wrote a book about the last point and about how CL achieves it. https://www.apress.com/us/book/9781484261330 https://www.apress.com/us/book/9781484261330)

vram22 6y ago
Why does the first part of your (first) sentence imply the second part? The two parts are separated by the word "makes".
- phoe-krk 6y ago
  In theory, a Common Lisp implementation is not required to be image-based. The standard permits a Common Lisp compiler that can e.g. be a batch file compiler that turns files into binaries, and then those can be executed without lots of live-programming, image-based goodies. No CL implementation I'm aware of follows this paradigm.
  - lispm 6y ago
    even live programming does not require images. In most CL systems, image-based technically means it can dump memory to images on disk and start those. More exotic is nowadays, when quitting a Lisp system always writes all the changes to a new image, which then will be started next time. ECL does not support images, but has live programming, MOCL does not support images, nor full live programming. There are/were a bunch of CL compilers which work similar. They support then only a subset of CL - a subset without some runtime support for things like EVAL or COMPILE. Typically non-image based and non-live Lisp compilers were written for the compilation of Lisp to C, with the purpose of generating small static executables, MOCL does that. MOCL is based on the earlier CLICC compiler.
  - vram22 6y ago
    Thanks.