23 ms·

I miss my common lisp days, and I think rust being able to export C ABIs makes it a really great companion language for CL. I also think common lisp (or really,

I miss my common lisp days, and I think rust being able to export C ABIs makes it a really great companion language for CL. I also think common lisp (or really, any fast lisp) is a really great tool for game development. The fact that you can redefine a program as it's running really helps iterate without having to set up your state over and over. Pair that with a fast, low-level language that can handle a lot of the lower level stuff (been trying to find time to look at Bevy on rust), and you have a killer combo. The main reason I stopped using lisp was because of the community. There were some amazing people that helped out with a lot of the stuff I was building, but not a critical mass of them and things just kind of stagnated. Then it seemed like for every project I poured my soul into, someone would write a one-off copy of it "just because" instead of contributing. It's definitely a culture of lone-wolf programmers. CL is a decent language with some really good implementations, and everywhere I go I miss the macros. I definitely want to pick it up again sometime, but probably will just let the async stuff I used to work on rest in peace.

a-dub 5y ago
i assume you're familiar with GOAL? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Oriented_Assembly_Lisp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Oriented_Assembly_Lisp
- orthecreedence 5y ago
  I was not! Thanks for the tip.
sahil-kang 5y ago
I can understand the failure to build a critical mass of contributors, but can you share some examples of where your work was duplicated instead of built upon? I’ve read through some of your async work in the past and from an initial glance, it seemed like you had the right idea by wrapping existing event libs and exposing familiar event loop idioms. At the very least, it seemed uncontroversial so I’m interested to see why others would choose not to build upon it.
- orthecreedence 5y ago
  > can you share some examples of where your work was duplicated instead of built upon? Wookie (http://wookie.lyonbros.com/ http://wookie.lyonbros.com/) was the main one, or at least the most obnoxious to me. I was trying to create a general-purpose HTTP application server on top of cl-async. Without naming any specific projects, it was duplicated because it (and/or cl-async) wasn't fast enough. > At the very least, it seemed uncontroversial so I’m interested to see why others would choose not to build upon it. A superficial need for raw performance seemed to be the biggest reason. The thing is, I wasn't opposed at all to discussions and contributions regarding performance. I was all about it. Oh well.

a-dub 5y ago

i assume you're familiar with GOAL? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Oriented_Assembly_Lisp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Oriented_Assembly_Lisp

orthecreedence 5y ago
I was not! Thanks for the tip.

sahil-kang 5y ago

I can understand the failure to build a critical mass of contributors, but can you share some examples of where your work was duplicated instead of built upon? I’ve read through some of your async work in the past and from an initial glance, it seemed like you had the right idea by wrapping existing event libs and exposing familiar event loop idioms. At the very least, it seemed uncontroversial so I’m interested to see why others would choose not to build upon it.

orthecreedence 5y ago
> can you share some examples of where your work was duplicated instead of built upon? Wookie (http://wookie.lyonbros.com/ http://wookie.lyonbros.com/) was the main one, or at least the most obnoxious to me. I was trying to create a general-purpose HTTP application server on top of cl-async. Without naming any specific projects, it was duplicated because it (and/or cl-async) wasn't fast enough. > At the very least, it seemed uncontroversial so I’m interested to see why others would choose not to build upon it. A superficial need for raw performance seemed to be the biggest reason. The thing is, I wasn't opposed at all to discussions and contributions regarding performance. I was all about it. Oh well.