4 ms·

It’s a lisp, so it’s eminently hackable - you can do everything with it, and simultaneously nothing ;p I love lisps. Why choose slope over something like racke

by garren 4y ago

It’s a lisp, so it’s eminently hackable - you can do everything with it, and simultaneously nothing ;p I love lisps. Why choose slope over something like racket or maybe clojure(script)?

empressplay 4y ago
It seems like it's halfway between those things and Logo. So, simpler but with some modern paradigms thrown in to make it more 'respectable'...
- creative_spirit 4y ago
  Check what it says about the hobby language - it is not meant to attract huge crowds, so it does not need to be 'respectable'. For me it is good if it raises associations with Logo, though - as Logo was also providing way to computing for 'non-professionals' - thus keeping the fun and joy of computing.
- sloum 4y ago
  I would agree. Simple and old school, but with a dash of modern features was what I was going for. I used Logo a good bit when I was young, so I can appreciate the comparison.
capableweb 4y ago
> It’s a lisp, so it’s eminently hackable Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's missing one vital lisp feature for making it actually hackable: macros! Couldn't find anything about it in the docs and couldn't search the source code for it either, via their git webpage either.
- dgb23 4y ago
  Meta programming is still “trivial” (for the lack of a better word) in a lisp without using macros.
  - andsoitis 4y ago
    > Meta programming is still “trivial” (for the lack of a better word) in a lisp without using macros is there not a whole class of problems that are not trivial if you cannot control evaluation of forms / expressions? this is one of the things (non-reader) macros provide.
    - sparkie 4y ago
      You can still somewhat control evaluation with quote and/or list.
    - a1369209993 4y ago
      > if you cannot control evaluation of forms / expressions Assuming quote works, you can do: (eval (macro-expand '( # rest of file goes here ))) which I think technically meets the standards for "trivial", albeit annoying. (Edit: Although it'd have to be eval-with-macro-expand if you want proper first-class macros.)
    - dgb23 4y ago
      “Trivial” is the wrong word, but it’s fairly known/common to write an embedded interpreter. The line between interpreting and just plain programming is very blurry in a lisp.
creative_spirit 4y ago
I have limited experience with lisps, and for me a smaller language, that is easy to pick up, works well. I can finally do things in a lisp, without having to struggle with the full breadth and depth of the bigger guys (and I do not have to install e.g. jvm on my machine :). So for me it is a graceful way to work in a paradigm that I long like, but I somehow could not make my way to.

by garren 4y ago

It’s a lisp, so it’s eminently hackable - you can do everything with it, and simultaneously nothing ;p I love lisps. Why choose slope over something like racket or maybe clojure(script)?

empressplay 4y ago

It seems like it's halfway between those things and Logo. So, simpler but with some modern paradigms thrown in to make it more 'respectable'...

creative_spirit 4y ago
Check what it says about the hobby language - it is not meant to attract huge crowds, so it does not need to be 'respectable'. For me it is good if it raises associations with Logo, though - as Logo was also providing way to computing for 'non-professionals' - thus keeping the fun and joy of computing.
sloum 4y ago
I would agree. Simple and old school, but with a dash of modern features was what I was going for. I used Logo a good bit when I was young, so I can appreciate the comparison.

capableweb 4y ago

> It’s a lisp, so it’s eminently hackable Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's missing one vital lisp feature for making it actually hackable: macros! Couldn't find anything about it in the docs and couldn't search the source code for it either, via their git webpage either.

dgb23 4y ago
Meta programming is still “trivial” (for the lack of a better word) in a lisp without using macros.
- andsoitis 4y ago
  > Meta programming is still “trivial” (for the lack of a better word) in a lisp without using macros is there not a whole class of problems that are not trivial if you cannot control evaluation of forms / expressions? this is one of the things (non-reader) macros provide.
  - sparkie 4y ago
    You can still somewhat control evaluation with quote and/or list.
  - a1369209993 4y ago
    > if you cannot control evaluation of forms / expressions Assuming quote works, you can do: (eval (macro-expand '( # rest of file goes here ))) which I think technically meets the standards for "trivial", albeit annoying. (Edit: Although it'd have to be eval-with-macro-expand if you want proper first-class macros.)
  - dgb23 4y ago
    “Trivial” is the wrong word, but it’s fairly known/common to write an embedded interpreter. The line between interpreting and just plain programming is very blurry in a lisp.

creative_spirit 4y ago

I have limited experience with lisps, and for me a smaller language, that is easy to pick up, works well. I can finally do things in a lisp, without having to struggle with the full breadth and depth of the bigger guys (and I do not have to install e.g. jvm on my machine :). So for me it is a graceful way to work in a paradigm that I long like, but I somehow could not make my way to.