3 ms·
I think it's unfortunate that more people aren't aware of the benefits of using Common Lisp as an implementation target for their new language. All you have to
by ScottBurson 12y ago
I think it's unfortunate that more people aren't aware of the benefits of using Common Lisp as an implementation target for their new language. All you have to do is to parse your language into list structure and write macros to translate it into Lisp. You get an interpreter and a native-code compiler for free! And there's a long list of language features for you to build on: GC of course, plenty of built-in types (including lists, arrays, and several kinds of numbers) -- and the crown jewel, CLOS, with multiple inheritance, multiple dispatch, and of course, the MOP.
I understand why a lot of people aren't interested in writing CL directly -- though I am still fond of it; it does suffer somewhat from historical baggage. But if you're layering another language on top of it, none of that matters. And it's a great platform.
- techdragon 12y agoI keep thinking it would be a great idea, then I go and look for the 'right lisp to run it on' and slink back out of the dark alley carefully before I run sprinting back to something much more standard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Lisp#Implementations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Lisp#Implementations Only Movitz ever looked interesting enough to get me started on pre-prototype. But it was shortly abandoned as the usefulness didn't translate to the more used lisp implementations.