4 ms·
I have gone through "Practical Common Lisp", went through pains of integrating CL into vim, did my share of googling for libraries and found CL to be impractica
by old-gregg 17y ago
I have gone through "Practical Common Lisp", went through pains of integrating CL into vim, did my share of googling for libraries and found CL to be impractical for production use (for my projects). Yet I keep seeing the argument in favor of CL because it's got more libraries and "built-in practical functionality".
Can you please elaborate? I haven't played with Scheme yet, but http://docs.plt-scheme.org http://docs.plt-scheme.org looks more impressive than anything I've seen for CL so far: lots of stuff in one place and guaranteed to work.
Thanks!
- rw 17y agoI, too, am basing the libraries claim on others' opinions. I quit CL because I found the system too complex to fully grok, and what 21st-century technologies I needed were not standardized (see: concurrency). I would've been stuck either a) only able to use one implementation, like SBCL, or b) trying to roll my own half-assed implementation of a notoriously-huge language. There is a very nice chunk of CL that is good at what it does, is fast as hell, and nice to code in. But there is so much cruft attached!
- wglb 17y agoWhat obstacles did you find in your production use? I am heavily down this path already.