flavio81

7 ms·

31.
by flavio81 6y ago
>Is there a good argument against Clojure in this case? I use Common Lisp and my main argument will be that Clojure isn't an "interactive programming" language like Common Lisp, Smalltalk (and Pharo, Squeak, Scratch) are.
32.
by flavio81 6y ago
>And found them to be very hostile. I started 4 years ago. They are very helpful and friendly. Just approach them with a genuine interest.
33.
by flavio81 6y ago
>Is it possible to build web apps in common lisp or any lisp? Any frameworks available? Yes, many. >Is it possible to build multithreaded apps that use multiple CPU cores for performance? What is used? POSIX threads? Yes, threads, the
34.
by flavio81 6y ago
>I use VS Code and Vim. Are they suitable for learning Lisp? Better install Portacle, that's the only thing you need to install to edit, compile, and debug Common Lisp code. Then you can learn by reading a good book like a "Gen
35.
by flavio81 6y ago
>Someone just needs to write tslisp that converts the TypeScript AST into s-expressions... Well, this is actually a very good idea!
36.
by flavio81 6y ago
>80% of Common Lisp. So, does it include bit-arrays, custom hash tables, multimethods, method combinations, the condition-restarts signalling system, ability to place items on the stack instead of on the garbage collector, type declarati
37.
by flavio81 6y ago
> slow implementation of half of Common Lisp." Now with more JavaScript. Yes, but Eslisp doesn't even implement 10% of Common Lisp... Not that eslisp isn't useful. I think it's useful!!
38.
by flavio81 6y ago
>Is the implication here that people build on top of ecosystems because they're incapable of implementing things themselves in plain JS, and that lisp will make them capable? Not exactly, but Lisp (specifically Common Lisp but also
39.
by flavio81 6y ago
>Common Lisp isn't typed It is heavily typed. Very strongly typed for the most part (except numbers). So typed that it won't accept a "character vector" in the place of a string. But type checking is mostly at runtime
40.
by flavio81 6y ago
>Hacker Robert Morris later declared a corollary, which clarifies the set of "sufficiently complicated" programs to which the rule applies "...including Common Lisp." This is referring to CL implementations that depen
41.
by flavio81 6y ago
> It should be possible for tooling to just show you the expansion of any given macro invocation. In fact, when I used Clojure a decade ago, there was an Emacs command that would expand the macro invocation under your cursor, so you coul
42.
by flavio81 6y ago
>in general, you can't know what the program will do until you run it It needs to be added that in Common Lisp, once the program is running you can do everything with it while it's running: Inspect the stack frames, change vari
43.
by flavio81 6y ago
>Could you give me an example of a real-world software engineering task which takes “weeks” in Python and minutes in Lisp? Not "weeks vs hours" but let me offer my personal experience. I already had around 3 years of profession
44.
by flavio81 6y ago
I've used Lisp for a production system I delivered one year ago. I used CCL as an implementation and had a lot of success. Here i'll cover your points: > poor ecosystem of libraries - few gems, most other half-baked I'd sa
45.
by flavio81 6y ago
>I have noticed that deployment and compilation part of lisp isn't talked about often. Because it's trivial. Compilation is almost implicit, when loading a file. Creating an executable is only one line of code.
46.
by flavio81 6y ago
>The post [1] (though old) - hints at no good libs for json That's his opinion. We have a lot of JSON libs, maybe too many. I use "jonathan" and i'm happy with it. EDIT: He wrote: "JSON support in Common Lisp is
47.
by flavio81 6y ago
>From what I read it took a whole summer to write in lisp and the rewrite in python took a weekend. And one guy in comp.lang.lisp wrote a working Reddit 1.0 clone in Lisp in 4 hours: https://groups.google.com/d/msg&#
48.
by flavio81 6y ago
> and stuck with Common Lisp's woeful hash table interface and the loop macro keywords You are not stuck with anything in Common Lisp. Instead of loop you have lots of options, from the built-in constructs (do, dolist, map...) to ve
49.
by flavio81 6y ago
>I think Reddit's decision to move from Common Lisp That original Reddit system was very simple, yet the Lisp source code was of poor quality (it is currently available on the web). When it was released, the lispers at comp.lang.lis
50.
by flavio81 6y ago
Or, since Janet is a bytecode interpreter with a download size of <2MB, there's CLISP which also fits that criteria, while providing the full power of Common Lisp and a nice FFI with C.
51.
by flavio81 6y ago
>Does anyone have pointers to books or websites to learn 'real-world' LISP programming? https://lisp-lang.org/learn/getting-started/ You can start here to set up your IDE and then read the "Pract
52.
by flavio81 6y ago
More precisely, Lisp ... without cons, without arbitrary precision integers, fixed precision integers, rationals and complex numbers, without image-based development, without the conditions-restart system, without CLOS, etc. It's inter
53.
by flavio81 6y ago
Golang's garbage collection system isn't just NOT state-of-the-art; it brings you back to the 1970s. A big pain point there.
54.
by flavio81 6y ago
>Even installing new dependencies into a running image is a breeze, and no need to restart anything. You don't even need to leave the REPL!
55.
by flavio81 6y ago
Hilarious, but true!
56.
by flavio81 6y ago
RMS dislike of CL was purely due to personal factors: He felt cheated by the Lisp machine industry.
57.
by flavio81 6y ago
> There's even a show_expr method that prints it as an S-expression. Yes. However, the 99.9999% of Julia code out there isn't in s-expressions. Every Julia programmer doesn't use s-expressions. They use Julia syntax. Thus,
58.
by flavio81 6y ago
Python doesn't really have anonymous functions (unless they are 1-line functions, which, in python, means they can't do much.) This pretty much disqualifies it as a functional programming language. Additionally, Guido and the comm
59.
by flavio81 6y ago
>Common lisp by comparison, feels arcane, outdated and non lispy. Only if your knowledge of Common Lisp is at the level of "armchair specialist".
60.
by flavio81 6y ago
>Yeah and the original cons cells had proper equality defined on them, which common lisp doesn't have. Substantiate your claims.

More ›