freenode/#lisp - IRC Chatlog
Search
20:18:30
shrdlu68
varjagg: There will likely be warnings about some of the certificates in the bundle having issues, they'll just be skipped.
20:27:34
shrdlu68
varjagg: You could try using curl's bundle: https://curl.haxx.se/docs/caextract.html
20:33:17
varjagg
shrdlu68: that got me a bit further, now it throws x509-decoding-error from x509-decode
20:36:03
shrdlu68
What site did you try to connect to? Let me try to reproduce it, and get curl's ca bundle as well.
20:47:12
minion
sjl, memo from flip214: thanks a lot for the vlime update.... (but) I'm currently looking at spacemacs.... let's see.
20:47:56
sjl
According to the ADSF manual the only correct value for this slot is (keyword string), but I see systems on Github using all kinds of things there, like:
20:48:57
sjl
Ideally I'd like to be able to specify *multiple* entries there, e.g. :source-control ((:git "github.com/...") (:hg "bitbucket.org/..."))
20:51:38
Xach
If you use something contrary to the ASDF manual, it might stop working and break in the future just out of spite.
20:53:16
Xach
sjl: I dig through system file forms but I don't do anything with source-control, personally.
20:53:40
sjl
Shinmera: I use mercurial because git's ui is a shitshow, but want to still provide a github mirror to accept PRs.
20:54:08
jackdaniel
osune: I mean :shared-library and :static-library, for some complementary doc see: https://common-lisp.net/project/ecl/static/ecldoc/Extensions.html#System-building
20:54:08
minion
jackdaniel, memo from osune: the :type :shared-object / :static-object is not mentioned in the Documentation? Thanks again for the hints :)
20:54:22
sjl
Xach: yeah that's what I figured. I'll just leave it blank, I think. The README lists the repos anyway.
20:54:34
shrdlu68
varjagg: There are non-ascii characters in the ca certificate, which is throwing off a function that tries to distinguish between DER and PEM files by the fact that PEM files are supposed to be ASCII (base64-encoded): https://github.com/shrdlu68/cl-tls/blob/master/src/utils.lisp#L125
20:56:48
sjl
Shinmera: Vim has fugitive which makes it tolerable, but I don't like using a TUI for version control. I want shell commands with a sane syntax.
20:57:33
osune
jackdaniel: uhm what is the difference between https://common-lisp.net/project/ecl/static/manual/ and https://common-lisp.net/project/ecl/static/ecldoc ?
21:00:24
jackdaniel
osune: manual is complete to some degree, ecldoc is wip (but has some chapters expanded)
21:15:27
shrdlu68
varjag: It seems to work with other sites: twitter.com, facebook.com, github.com...
21:21:31
varjag
"Error encountered while checking the certificate status. Details: Response status: unauthorized"
21:22:23
shrdlu68
That's OCSP. The OCSP server responded with "unauthorized", so cl-tls couldn't verify the revocation status.
21:22:54
Xach
ACTION ponders replacing system-index.txt with system-index.cdb for insanely large system-index.txt files
21:47:28
rpg
sjl: The source control metadata aren't used for anything. An issue in ASDF is that on the one hand one wants to encourage people to provide useful information, of just about any sort, but on the other hand, one wishes to provide useful error-checking to help people debug their system declarations.
21:48:02
rpg
Perhaps I should have said "ASDF itself doesn't use the source control metadata for anything."
21:49:24
shrdlu68
varjag: cl-tls validated every single certificate in the chain upto the root found in the trusted CA certificates. In the case of Google, it doesn't find a matching root at the last step of the chain.
21:52:31
shrdlu68
The last certificate presented by the server says it's issued by "Equifax Secure Certificate Authority"
21:55:31
shrdlu68
There's no certificate identifying itself as "Equifax Secure Certificate Authority" in the curl ca bundle, that's why validation is failing.
21:57:32
shrdlu68
It seems most clients are configured to validate up to just below the final level (a "depth" argument). If I do that with cl-tls, it works in this case.
22:00:10
varjag
i could hack that in for my specific case, or are you going to push that to the repo?
22:03:35
shrdlu68
https://github.com/shrdlu68/cl-tls/blob/master/src/x509/validate.lisp#L54 Changing (length chain) to (1- (length chain)) makes it work.
22:15:02
shrdlu68
www.bitstampt.net fails because of OCSP. If you disable revocation checking, it'll work: https://github.com/shrdlu68/cl-tls/blob/master/src/x509/validate.lisp#L84
0:21:18
rpg
I think my colleagues have used MongoDB from lisp, but I'm afraid I don't know what API they used.
0:22:04
aeth
I don't think there's a major modern NoSQL (or SQL) database written in Common Lisp. Most people who need a database afaik use postmodern to use PostgreSQL.
0:23:50
aeth
Some databases are written in Java, which is roughly the performance of SBCL (it's hard to compare languages) so there's probably nothing stopping someone from writing a DB in Lisp.
0:24:36
aeth
Interestingly, a database isn't on this list. http://metamodular.com/Common-Lisp/suggested-projects.html
3:41:19
jasom
that's the question a docstring should answer, with a secondary question of "when should I use this function"
3:41:33
jasom
if someone is looking at the docstring, they think they ought to use the function, but aren't sure how
3:42:03
jmercouris
e.g. second arg should be an int, this integer moderates the function in this way
3:42:56
aeth
e.g. if there's a meaningful return value "Returns foo..." or "and returns foo..." probably should be in that docstring
3:44:16
aeth
I usually write that in prose, but you could probably get away with literally just listing those
3:44:26
jasom
jmercouris: they should *not* document how the function works, that belongs in comments.
3:45:39
aeth
Ideally, the way the actual function works should be obvious, even if you need to add helper functions (there's basically no penalty if you move stuff out into meaningfully named functions that are inline)
3:46:13
jmercouris
aeth: I thought declaring functions inline within a function form was a bad idea?
3:46:54
aeth
jmercouris: no, I mean move stuff to top-level helper functions that are obvious if some part of your function isn't obvious, rather than comment
3:47:20
jasom
jmercouris: inputs/outputs/side-effects is a good checklist for "how do I use this function"
3:47:43
jmercouris
if there is enough complexity that warrants a comment, you should probably abstract it out into a function?
3:47:43
aeth
I'm agreeing with jasom that "that belongs in comments", but then adding that imo if you do need to comment, you probably should break the function up
3:49:11
jasom
jmercouris: aeth is suggesting (foo bar baz (biff (boff buff))) ;; I can't just frobnotz bar and baz because sbcl's optimizer is dumbs --- instead: (frobnotz-efficiently-on-sbcl bar baz)
3:50:18
aeth
jmercouris: If you are mostly going to avoid side-effects, you might like the Scheme convention of ! when there are side effects present
3:51:04
Zhivago
jasom: Perhaps that's something that would be better solved by adding a compiler-macro for sbcl rather than changing the code.
3:52:19
aeth
Pretty much the only thing in "Conventions in Scheme" that you should never do and I've never seen is $foo for constant (since CL has +foo+) http://www.cliki.net/Naming+conventions
3:53:26
aeth
jmercouris: The problem with alternatives to "foo!" is that there is no direct CL equivalent. The n in nfoo means "non-consing" but that doesn't guarantee that it is destructive... also you can be both destructive and cons
3:59:37
aeth
I think you don't see foo! in CL because Lispers don't care about destructive code as much as Schemers... but if you're writing part of a program that does care, why not use that convention?
4:02:34
aeth
jmercouris: Oh, and before you mentioned about documenting types. Don't trust the user imo.
4:03:48
aeth
There are two approaches. check-type is 100% portable, but not necessarily what you want. Type declarations might just assume the type in Cthulhu Lisp or some other non-euclidean eldrich abomination lisp from before time, but should work as expected on most modern Lisps when saftey != 0 (and that should always be the case)
4:05:09
aeth
A ton of code written recently uses type declarations and assumes they work as expected, with type checking when safety != 0
4:06:37
aeth
Iirc, an added advantage of type declarations is that they don't need to check type if they're running on Lisp machine hardware that is designed with Lisp types in mind.
4:13:03
aeth
It can generate very efficient code for non-bignum numbers and sequences because a lot of built-in functions are generic over numbers or sequences (like + or map)
4:13:31
aeth
Although a check-type should produce a very similar result, just with the type-checking in the function instead of before the function
4:14:42
jasom
jmercouris: there is no exaustive list of types since e.g. (integer 5 8) would be all integers in the range [5,8)
4:14:58
aeth
Actually, the checking in a foo with type declarations seems to be considerably more concise than the checking in a foobar with check-type when I use sb-disassem:disassemble-code-component to see the full disassembly (which disassemble does not provide)
4:15:12
jasom
jmercouris: but the hyperspec lists types in the various sections (e.g. the numeric types are listed in the chapter on numbers)
4:15:36
aeth
this might be SBCL specific, but I think it's because of the semantics of check-type vs type declarations
4:16:30
aeth
Hmm, this seems to be the difference in SBCL. check-type will let you insert a valid replacement and a type declaration won't
4:18:37
jmercouris
ah, so a type is a function that accepts args to produce some sort of check function?
4:19:15
jmercouris
well (integer 5 8) looks like a function call to "integer" with the arguments 5 and 8
4:20:23
jasom
you will almost never define a new parameterized type in lisp because Lisps type parameterization is not very powerful
4:20:54
aeth
You almost certainly want to restrict the integer type for it to be useful. "fixnum" is the laziest way to do it, but is non-portable. Stuff like (unsigned-byte 8) and (unsigned-byte 32) are great because they're almost certainly going to be supported in 64-bit implementations' specialized-arrays
4:21:38
aeth
But if you want type information to produce more efficient code you really want the compiler to know that the integer is never going to be a bignum (which might have to require more complicated code on your end)
4:22:27
jasom
jmercouris: cmucl and sbcl at least will emit some compile-time checks in the presence of types, and will always emit run-time errors if safety is non-zero
4:22:27
aeth
Afaik, for the most part, the compiler already knows what the type has to for a variable be by the function you try to use on it.
4:22:33
Bike
if you want an actual assertion, use check-type or negotiate with your vendor (i.e. read the manual)
4:23:19
jasom
jmercouris: yeah, once you use a lisp like that, it becomes so obviously the right way, that most implementations have copied it
4:23:47
aeth
Bike: I think it's more nuanced than that, i.e.: For the most part the compiler does know anything between function boundaries because (foo 42) might return 43 now, but could be redefined at runtime to return "Hello, World!"
4:24:22
jmercouris
I just want to emit useful error messages to the user if they have supplied an incorrect type
4:24:51
jmercouris
because if the compiler knew what I was trying to program, it could possibly do it for me instead of me having to type it out :D
4:27:17
aeth
jmercouris: instead of having a foo-fixnum, foo-single-float, foo-double-float, foo-bignum, etc., you can just have one foo
4:28:09
aeth
If it's inline, it produces exactly the same code as if you had that many inline functions
4:28:34
aeth
But... you could do an inline function call as a sort of compromise (and that's probably common enough that that library should support it imo)
4:29:41
aeth
(class-of (make-array 3 :element-type 'single-float)) => #<BUILT-IN-CLASS SB-KERNEL::SIMPLE-ARRAY-SINGLE-FLOAT>
4:29:48
aeth
(type-of (make-array 3 :element-type 'single-float)) => (SIMPLE-ARRAY SINGLE-FLOAT (3))
4:30:05
aeth
Not only is that class not portable afaik, it also doesn't have some critical information, like length
4:30:54
aeth
And, yeah, specialization store is most useful when you want to inline or at least inline the function call so the runtime dispatch is avoided
4:31:47
aeth
Dealing with C libraries through CFFI is a nightmare... and C++ is ultra-nightmare or something.
4:45:26
aeth
jmercouris: My personal design philosophy for my Lisp code is that anything that can be done ahead of runtime should.
4:59:50
jmercouris
beach: Good morning, and in case I don't see ya, good afternoon, good evening, and good night!
5:02:36
aeth
Do implementations turn (list 1 2 3 4 5) into (cons 1 (cons 2 (cons 3 (cons 4 (cons 5 nil))))) or is there a better way that I'm overlooking?
5:03:14
jmercouris
aeth: I don't see how you could avoid the linking operations when making a linked list
5:04:58
aeth
https://github.com/sbcl/sbcl/blob/0d398686138fa05504c57567d28130cb85fb143e/src/code/list.lisp#L343-L345
5:09:37
aeth
To save people a click, the source is just this when newlines and the docstring are removed: (defun list (&rest args) args)
5:10:28
pillton
aeth: Specialization store can do the optimization you were talking about before. https://github.com/markcox80/specialization-store/blob/master/tests/standard-store-syntax-layer.lisp#L357
5:11:11
jmercouris
just because SBCL happens to make a list of args and then returns that list, doesn't mean that along the line it didn't make the list in the way you are describing
5:11:38
jmercouris
I don't see how it is avoidable to make a linked list without linking the elements of the list
5:12:25
aeth
pillton: so named specializations are inline function calls instead of runtime dispatch?
5:15:59
aeth
jmercouris: And that's why I promote specialization-store, btw. The library literally anticipates my feature requests and then implements them in the past
5:22:04
aeth
jmercouris: Possibly, but mere blockchains aren't enough. Smart contracts are what people want now.
5:33:25
aeth
jmercouris: Formal verification for general purpose programming, yes, but smart contracts kind of need them because hundreds of millions of dollars are on the line.
5:33:52
aeth
So you kind of have to program more like NASA and less like a JavaScript web developer when you're doing an Ethereum clone
5:34:52
jmercouris
I've done formal verification, and, it is not a fun time, nor is it easy, nor is it even possible truly except for on some embedded systems
5:34:53
aeth
They're absolutely not doing anything close to reliable programming. e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16148608
5:35:32
aeth
jmercouris: yes, but solving it for smart contracts on blockchains is probably a $1,000,000,000 idea.
5:36:27
jmercouris
people literally PAY for microsoft, when there are free pieces of software that are better, blows my mind
5:36:30
aeth
Reliable smart contracts in Common Lisp practically writes itself for Hacker News. Guaranteed #1 position on the site. :-p
5:37:41
jmercouris
like "what makes CL great is the fact that it recently surpassed javascript for number of active developers"
5:40:28
aeth
jmercouris: My favorite part is that the language apparently has no garbage collection *and* no manual memory management.
5:42:37
aeth
And it's just integers, so you'd have to call in a contract that is a fixed-point arithmetic library and hope you can trust it iirc
5:43:51
jmercouris
I could design a better language by throwing darts at a board of language features
5:45:17
aeth
They apparently decided to release early and hype it so that they could then get the resources to implement it properly.
5:45:55
aeth
jmercouris: Oh, and apparently the reason it's slow is not because it's distributed but because it runs in a 256 bit VM.
5:46:38
jmercouris
writing fast distributed software is hard enough with all of the scheduling and memory challenges, why do this?
5:47:26
aeth
I'm guessing that that's probably large enough to express all of its currency as an integer (which is necessary because of how badly it handles numbers), whereas 64-bit and 128-bit wouldn't be
5:49:28
jmercouris
to be fair, when I was 20, I was struggling to write my own implementation of malloc
5:50:20
aeth
jmercouris: If you are serious, I'd start with a fixed-point math library. You generally want decimal fixed-point math for currency (e.g. at 1/10000 to represent 1/100th of a cent), although if it's cryptocurrency, you might just want to work in powers of 2 all of the time for efficiency (i.e. use ash)
5:52:06
aeth
jmercouris: Well, I know the pain point you're going to reach: cryptography. I wouldn't trust any pure-Lisp crypto libraries with real money of any kind (not battle-tested enough), including cryptocurrency.
5:53:03
aeth
If you could actually do an ICO, you could pay some crypto person to write a pure-Lisp crypto library that is reliable, at least in SBCL
5:54:38
aeth
jmercouris: No, if you were serious about writing a white paper for an ICO, just get a PhD to write it and invite a PhD to the team. PhD + writes lots of papers. There are several here afaik.
5:55:15
jmercouris
aeth: I'm totally joking, I bet the SEC is going to begin regulating ICOs in the near-term and I don't want to be involved in that legislative nightmare that will arise
5:55:21
aeth
I'm sure writing a VM in CL to run a blockchain-distributed reliable program (Rust-like or Haskell-like) would be a project someone would want in on
5:56:18
aeth
jmercouris: An ICO is almost certainly a bad idea, but a blockchain probably has enough interest from SEO-approved investors at this point.
5:56:44
jmercouris
aeth: That is probably true, just throw that word into any presentation and people just lose it
6:00:08
aeth
jmercouris: All you need is: a fixed-point math library, a proof-of-stake blockchain, a VM to run smart contracts on that blockchain, a Haskell-like or Rust-like language with Lisp syntax to run on that VM. That would near-guarantee a $1,000,000,000 market cap for that cryptocoin. There are already 38 (!!!) valued that much.
6:01:12
jmercouris
the key here is marketing, there are thousands, if not tens of thousands of cyrpto languages
6:03:56
aeth
There are a lot of shitcoins with nothing to offer except being a github fork of Bitcoin or Litecoin or something. It would be hard to find a unique name for a cryptocurrency
6:07:58
aeth
this name is probably taken a million times for a million different things, but "clash" would be the perfect name, imo. A pun on the "cl" prefix a lot of cl libraries/programs have, and "cash"
6:14:00
jmercouris
so actually, the language is irrelevant to them, it just happens to be in cl, which is conveniently easy for us
6:14:26
aeth
there are some investors on the Lisp hype train, although probably not as many as in the past
6:16:07
jmercouris
we could just call it the "Smart" platform "self-learning machine application technology"
6:16:37
aeth
"closure" would be the most clever name of your list, too bad it is too close to clojure and clozure
6:19:21
jmercouris
sounds like a plan, I'm going to sleep for now, but let me know which yachts you'd like to check out tomorrow
6:22:09
aeth
(It's funny how a game franchise about stealing virtual vehicles somehow became a game about buying virtual vehicles with RL money.)
6:25:27
aeth
It would actually be interesting for the #lisp community to explore the idea of Lisp smart contracts, even though it's about 4 years too late to make real money from the idea.
6:26:51
aeth
Imo if you're semi-serious about seeing where this could go (1) don't expect any money because of all of the competition, (2) whoever writes white papers for fun gets to be project lead
6:30:08
aeth
I do think that the Lisp community could make something better than Ethereum fairly easily with the existing ecosystem