lispm

380 ms·

3211.
by lispm 9y ago
I have a couple of Lisp Machines at home. They ran an object-oriented OS fully written in Lisp incl. window system, networking with TCP/IP, object-oriented database, text editor, graphics editor, 3d suite used by companies like Nintend
3212.
by lispm 9y ago
The LispWorks 64bit Hobbyist edition is $750, which makes it less than 'thousands of dollars' for a hobby user. Actually SLIME has some support for mouse pushers, too.
3213.
by lispm 9y ago
> I don't doubt that you can write productive systems in CL (bit of a fan myself), but the "oh we have smart compilers that just make it as fast as C" just isn't true. But 50% of C is great. Imagine in Lisp you can ac
3214.
by lispm 9y ago
If you feel the need to contribute code, then there is Quicklisp to distribute it. > Not as much as they should, which is the whole point of the article, and a core lesson of history. One of the uses of Lisp is prototyping. The Interface
3215.
by lispm 9y ago
> Simple short benchmarks don't show a complete picture of the language, since they're easy to optimize I didn't say anything about short benchmarks. > At the time when computers had 32/64 MB of RAM. Exactly. Phone
3216.
by lispm 9y ago
> started writing Postgres in LISP. Had to revert that decision as everything was an order of magnitude slower If they have never written a high-performance application in Lisp, they would have needed a bit more work. The Lisp version wa
3217.
by lispm 9y ago
> Writing rudimentary X takes 2-3 days. Writing it as solid package takes 2-3 weeks. Why don't you implement it? The research of Gregor Kiczales and others prior to AspectJ took something like decades with a lot of researchers worki
3218.
by lispm 9y ago
> 1) performance costs Keep in mind that a compiler like SBCL will put Lisp performancewise in the range of other statically compiled language/implementations. > 2) puts steep memory requirements on top of performance costs Such
3219.
by lispm 9y ago
What I don't miss is the single address space memory without any protection or the relatively primitive multitasking.
3220.
by lispm 9y ago
Why should it be 'projectional editing'? All you see in Apple Dylan is a bunch of browsers/editors, conceptually similar to what a Smalltalk or Interlisp IDE did, but with a different UI. As you can see in the screen shots, i
3221.
by lispm 9y ago
No, it had its own - at least in the 'released' technology preview. The Dylan Interface Builder was written in Dylan itself and was loaded directly into the running Dylan application. The Apple Dylan IDE itself was running as a se
3222.
by lispm 9y ago
It's not 'Intentional Programming', just because it uses a source object store and some browsers too.
3223.
by lispm 9y ago
Note that the Apple Dylan IDE is written mostly in Macintosh Common Lisp. Only its Interface Builder was written in Dylan, IIRC.
3224.
by lispm 9y ago
On a Symbolics Lisp Machine one lands in a low-level command loop, adds more virtual memory (swapping space on some disk) and then can continue from there.
3225.
by lispm 9y ago
CLOS: A combination of applicable methods from a generic function is applied to objects.
3226.
by lispm 9y ago
Just look at the sources of an editor written in Lisp (GNU Emacs and others) and Yi (in Haskell - https://github.com/yi-editor/yi ). Ask yourself which code you like more...
3227.
by lispm 9y ago
The LispWorks 64bit hobbyist license costs 600 Euro. It is not tied to a single machine and can run more then one process.
3228.
by lispm 9y ago
> And here I thought I was telling you that not everybody uses "first-class" (or even "first-class values") in precisely the same way. I know of no other definition of 'first-class value', which is an establ
3229.
by lispm 9y ago
It makes sense to use Lisp-specific tools with Lisp, otherwise the whole experience is underwhelming. The best Lisp tools are usually written in itself or some variant of it. On the Mac you can download Clozure Common Lisp from Apple's
3230.
by lispm 9y ago
There are many ways one would do that in various Lisps during development. For example a dynamic variable could be accessible in the debug repl: CL-USER 56 > (defvar *bar*) *BAR* CL-USER 57 > (defun foo (baz)
3231.
by lispm 9y ago
Telling explicitly what one wants to do actually helps the compiler and it helps with the maintenance. The compiler then can help me to find calls which are just accidents, name clashes, etc. In a Lisp-2 in the expression (sin 2) then SIN i
3232.
by lispm 9y ago
> regardless of any technical definitions you'll find in a textbook It's the definition of first-class values. You may have your own, but then you need to tell us what you mean first. Communication by redefining established ter
3233.
by lispm 9y ago
Interpreter (Clojure does not have one, so some debug functionality is painful to implement/use), readable error messages / stack traces, resident structure editor, clever break/trace packages, debug levels, ... were relative
3234.
by lispm 9y ago
I fear Lisp had already a better debugging experience in the mid to late 60s...
3235.
by lispm 9y ago
> For people used to Scheme (or most other programming languages, I guess) That's what LISP did since shortly after the last dinosaurs got killed by humans.
3236.
by lispm 9y ago
> The very fact that you must write (function sin), or #'sin, or use funcall is a way that it treats functions differently than normal values. Look closer. I have not used FUNCTION in 1), 2) or 3). Common Lisp does not treat functio
3237.
by lispm 9y ago
> does occasionally feel like functions aren't truly first-class in a lisp-2 The definition of 'first class functions' is not a feeling, but three capabilities: CL-USER 9 > (let ((sin-fn (function sin)))
3238.
by lispm 9y ago
For example: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exportweltmeister https://unstats.un.org/unsd/trade/imts/Historical%20data%201... Percentage of world exports in 1960: United States 16% West G
3239.
by lispm 9y ago
As I said Germany was already the world's second largest exporter in 1960. Behind the US, which has 4 times the population. Germany then became the largest exporter in 86, 87, 88, 90, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008. In 2016 Germany
3240.
by lispm 9y ago
Sure. The graphic is misleading, since it is not adjusted to GDP - thus it does not show the proportions of exports in relation to the size of the economy.

More ›