lispm

408 ms·

3691.
by lispm 10y ago
It's fully unclear, why I should explain all the features in detail to someone. I'd never do that and I know nobody who would be interested in it. You don't need to know all of it in detail. It's good to have an overview
3692.
by lispm 10y ago
> You mentioned Common Lisp - it's a great example of a cathedral. A language carefully designed by a committee, which took into consideration all the previous Lisps that were in popular usage. You can tell there was a lot of though
3693.
by lispm 10y ago
Lisp Machines had already something like Mathematica. It's called Macsyma and existed long before Mathematica. Macsyma was ported to Lisp Machines, in fact Lisp Machines exist partly because of Macsyma. It was one of the early Lisp app
3694.
by lispm 10y ago
LispWorks Prolog can use Prolog syntax inside Lisp: $ lispworks LispWorks(R): The Common Lisp Programming Environment Copyright (C) 1987-2014 LispWorks Ltd. All rights reserved. Version 7.0.0 CL-USER 1 > (require
3695.
by lispm 10y ago
You would not really need a specialized CPU anymore for a Lisp Machine. Those CPUs were invented to keep instructions small and efficient, provide large address spaces and enable simple compilers. In the last part of the 80s the trend to RI
3696.
by lispm 10y ago
That's slightly misleading: there are two things: the environment and a base language. Racket, as an environment, has compatibility due to its module/language approach to a bunch of languages. The older Scheme R5RS / R6RS are
3697.
by lispm 10y ago
They are/were not all incompatible. Once there was a lot of compatibility, backwards and by layers/libraries/translators. maclisp -> Common Lisp -> Eulisp (Eulisp took a lot of inspiration from Common Lis
3698.
by lispm 10y ago
Reduce/RLISP looks like this: symbolic procedure detq u; % Top level determinant function. begin integer len; len := length u; % Number of rows. for each x in u do if length x neq l
3699.
by lispm 10y ago
If you use Lisp, you have Prolog and Smalltalk, too. Built-in.
3700.
by lispm 10y ago
That's just one part of AI. If you want to see how 'dumb' the 'modern AI' is, you just have to use stuff like Google Translate. Modern. But dumb. Not AI.
3701.
by lispm 10y ago
But: (define (foo lst) (list (map + lst) (map - lst))) WTF? Or: (define (foo + - lst) (+ (reduce + lst) (reduce - lst))) (foo - +)
3702.
by lispm 10y ago
http://n4g.com/news/1268353/naughty-dog-will-use-existing-un...
3703.
by lispm 10y ago
> Pretty sensible in a dynamic language. For a dynamic language I would expect to be able to change objects, in many ways. Otherwise it would not be 'dynamic', but 'static'. > (2) Common Lisp: Only primitives are v
3704.
by lispm 10y ago
Naughty Dog used a custom Scheme system for their early games. That one was written in Allegro Common Lisp. When they were bought by Sony, they abandoned their tools and moved on to C++, hoping to share code with the rest of Sony game devel
3705.
by lispm 10y ago
Common Lisp allows us to develop object oriented software while it is running. Interactively. It changes classes and other objects, based on programmer changes. We can also add behavior to OOP mechanisms, like instance creation, slot alloca
3706.
by lispm 10y ago
There are some Lisp-related things which provide developers with new tools and new ways to think, maybe making them better: a) code as data b) interactive software development c) user-defined language extensions where the developer is part-
3707.
by lispm 10y ago
DWAVE uses Lisp / SBCL. http://www.dwavesys.com Some company doing mobile satellite-based Internet streaming used Lisp / Clozure CL.
3708.
by lispm 10y ago
> Let’s talk about code as data, shall we? What enables that? Of course, it’s the s-expressions and prefix notation. s-expressions and prefix notation are orthogonal concepts. Nothing in the definition of s-expressions says it uses prefi
3709.
by lispm 10y ago
This is how the LispWorks IDE on ARM/Linux/Gtk+ looks, when displayed on a Mac X11 server: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CoufhEFUkAExgqe.jpg:large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CouoF9DVUAUUhg
3710.
by lispm 10y ago
That's slightly backwards. The second Emacs (after TECO) was written in Lisp. On a Lisp Machine. Stallman later went for an Emacs, GNU Emacs, written on top of Lisp VM implemented in C. That one then got support for 'inferior&#x27
3711.
by lispm 10y ago
The bigger Lisp IDEs have a different idea. They use the running image as an information system about all the sources it has seen, which means, which it has loaded and/or compiled. Location of source, arguments, who calls who and from
3712.
by lispm 10y ago
'the lisp machine' did not do that. There were different attempts. The MIT Lisp Machine used Lisp code in files, with some tool support. The Xerox Lisp Machine (different hardware, different Lisp, different OS) used a different ap
3713.
by lispm 10y ago
That was done all and more in the Interlisp-D system.
3714.
by lispm 10y ago
> But loading these files with it to “dump” the Emacs binary? The only time I’ve heard of that was when reading a discussion about creating “executables” with Common Lisp which is apparently achieved by serializing the program’s current
3715.
by lispm 10y ago
https://github.com/blindglobe/common-lisp-stat
3716.
by lispm 10y ago
I would not think passing procedure pointers in C makes it able to support functional programming. That's very shallow. C lacks (last I looked) nested functions, closures, functions as first class data types, ... > Really the existe
3717.
by lispm 10y ago
Side effect free functional programming was taught using Lisp in the 60s. See "Pure Lisp", a style and subset, where no side-effects has been used.
3718.
by lispm 10y ago
Which is nonsense. Common Lisp and its implementations supports some parts of Functional Programming: * First Class Functions * Higher Order Functions * Anonymous Functions * Lexical Binding * Closures * TCO is supported by a variety of imp
3719.
by lispm 10y ago
> the definitive Emacs since '76 The Emacs from 76 and GNU Emacs are totally different programs. > When you think Emacs, you typically don't think THIEF, EINE, ZWEI, FINE, Edwin, Climacs, Hemlock, Efuns, Zile, QEmacs, Multic
3720.
by lispm 10y ago
No, it's not obvious. Stating that Stallman maintained Emacs since 1976 is misleading. Give the proper respect to the other Emacs authors/maintainers.

More ›