3 ms·
Speaking of which, anyone had success using these tools for coding Common Lisp?
by e40 1y ago
Speaking of which, anyone had success using these tools for coding Common Lisp?
- mark_h 1y agoJoe Marshall had a couple of posts about... No: https://funcall.blogspot.com/2025/05/vibe-coding-common-lisp-through-back.html https://funcall.blogspot.com/2025/05/vibe-coding-common-lisp...
- telotortium 1y agoVibe coding Common Lisp could probably work well with additional tool support. Even a good documentation lookup and search tool, exposed in an AGENTS.md file, could significantly improve the problem Joe ran into of having the code generate bogus symbols. If you provide a small MCP server or other tool to introspect a running image containing your application, it could be even better. LLMs can handle the syntax of basically any language, but the library knowledge is significantly improved by having a larger corpus of code than Common Lisp tends to have publicly available.
- fhd2 1y agoAgents no, LLMs yes. Not for generating code per se, but for answering questions. Common Lisp doesn't seem to have a strong influx of n00bs like me, and even though there's pretty excellent documentation, I find it sometimes hard to know what I'm looking for. LLMs definitely helped me a few times by answering my n00b questions I would have otherwise had to ask online.
- diggan 1y agoNot CL specifically but works well with Clojure and fits better than non-lisp languages (imo) once you give the LLM direct access to the repl