6 ms·
One of the prerequisites for using this is, apparently, an already-running X server.
by apetresc 13y ago
One of the prerequisites for using this is, apparently, an already-running X server.
- stmartin 13y agoHAHAHAHHA :)
- dman 13y agoCan this restriction be removed using EGL ?
- pyb 13y agoIn principle yes
- e12e 13y agoWell, the natural thing to do is compile the lisp to javascript and use webgl! Would be interesting to see how much is needed to get it running with some other gl context. Also -- maybe this'll run under OS X and windows without requiring a X server for the GL context?
- bane 13y agoSo by implementing none of the hard bits, LISP wins again!
- dman 13y agoLisp featured support for Garbage collection, exceptions done right, macros, optional typing, native compilation. In fact I would argue that many in the lisp community were so obsessed with the hard bits that they overlooked building simple things that see everyday use in the real world.
- lispm 13y agoQuite some bits were implemented in Lisp. Both simple and hard. Some of the bits are lost. For example the TI Explorer Lisp Machine came with an X11 server written in Lisp. On my Symbolics Lisp Machine I used the usual MIT X11 server written in C - this was possible because the Symbolics Lisp machine had a C compiler.
- gcr 13y agoI was under the impression that those machines evaluate Lisp forms at the hardware. How could a C compiler work? Does it translate your code into Lisp s-expressions, or is there like a bytecode layer in between?
- pyb 13y agoThis is an instance of a C to Lisp compiler that translates to s-expressions https://github.com/vsedach/Vacietis https://github.com/vsedach/Vacietis
- xenophonf 13y agoWhat do you think a compiler does? The target instruction set can be any Turing-complete language. Compiling C to LISP is no different than compiling LISP to C (e.g., GNU Common Lisp), compiling ML to Java (which is so easy students can do it in 300/400-level CS), and so on.
- stormcrowsx 13y agoYou make it sound of easy. How hard is it to go from a GC language to a non-GC language? What methods do you use to fill in GC?
- juliangoldsmith 13y agoIt's not that it doesn't implement the hard bits, it just re-implements the hard bits on top of the hard bits. It requires an OpenGL context, which generally requires you to have an X server running.
- pubby 13y agoIt should have been written using lazy evaluation. That way, it could use itself recursively as its own X server. /sarcasm
- jfoutz 13y agoI think Haskell has the market cornered on tying the knot. http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Tying_the_Knot http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Tying_the_Knot
- hga 13y agoWell, according to the Readme, it's a "decent OpenGL driver" which then means "unfortunately, a running X server :) (to create a GLX context)"