3 ms·
Interestingly it seems that there was no (extended?) mention of Common Lisp on the JVM: Armed Bear Common Lisp. It is not central to the argument, but if one we
by harperlee 3y ago
Interestingly it seems that there was no (extended?) mention of Common Lisp on the JVM: Armed Bear Common Lisp. It is not central to the argument, but if one were to decide to migrate from clojure to common lisp, I'd say that one low risk path would be to first validate that you are capable of working with common lisp, and only then start preparing to forego / replace all of your dependencies, which is one of the strong parts of clojure: the ability to leverage everything under the sun that exists in the java / jvm world.
- vindarel 3y agoI also hear good things about LispWork's Java interop (commercial).
- aidenn0 3y agoLast time I looked into it, ABCL was less performant than more recent JVM hosted languages. I am far from a JVM expert, but I was told that this is due to most development work on ABCL predating JVM enhancements for dynamism. There is also FOIL, which runs JVM (or CLR) in a separate process and provides a bridge for calling into JVM from lisp. It was written by Rich Hickey (the future author of Clojure), who observed that the reflection overhead was similar in magnitude to the serialization overhead!