freenode/#lisp - IRC Chatlog
Search
13:53:50
beach
mseddon: Ah, but Common Lisp is not a "scripting language", which explains why SBCL has much better performance. Instead Common Lisp is a general-purpose programming language, so good implementations must be sufficiently fast to compete with implementations of other general-purpose languages.
13:54:49
mseddon
beach: Yes, I'm aware, (actually returning to lisp from a 20 year haitus), I looked in horror as I sent that and knew someone would raise it :)
13:58:26
beach
That's not all there is to it. Designers of so-called scripting languages are often incompetent when it comes to language design and compiler technology. Not so for the very smart and very knowledgeable people who gave us the Common Lisp standard.
13:59:06
mseddon
beach: absolutely true. nearly every 'successful' language is just a crap recursive descent compiler that emits crap stack bytecode. mmm. cache trashing.
14:00:17
mseddon
v8 is quite interesting, but javascript braindamage definitely limits it excessively. Seems more like a self compiler really.
14:00:52
remexre
also impressive to me, SBCL on my pinebook pro also blows most compiled languages out of the water on compile speed, even when building binaries with a fresh sbcl process
14:01:55
remexre
yeah, I usually like Rust and Haskell a lot, but it's been excruicating to develop for them on that machine
14:03:24
mseddon
remexre, it is a rocket engine compared to Scala once you start depending on libraries that abuse the type system.
14:05:10
jackdaniel
ACTION sends a polite reminder, that this channel topic is common lisp [[ a friendly smile at the end -- :-) ]]
14:11:28
ajithmk
Are keywords scoped to a package? If there is symbol in a package, say s, we use it in another package like package:s or package::s. But if s is keyword, : get's in the way? Like package::s or package:::s?
14:14:24
ajithmk
So when reader encounters :foo in a package it interns FOO in keyword package. So :foo is available in any other package?
14:16:37
jackdaniel
it is defined that implementations are free to give meaning to that, but that would be by definition not portable
14:27:24
phoe
(let ((form (read *repl-stream*))) (cond ((eq form :command) ...) ... (t (print (eval form)))))
14:28:49
jackdaniel
also, if you had wanted to do what you've mentioned you want to, you'd want symbol-macrolets, not functions
14:28:55
mseddon
keywords as functions trip me up a lot on Clojure, but I guess that may be also hurt because it's a lisp-1
14:29:37
jackdaniel
even older implementations (most notably genera), started commands with a comma which is less ambigous
14:30:30
mseddon
Does CLIM use , for commands too? I seem to remember it has command tables like genera, but I am incredibly rusty.
14:32:01
jackdaniel
ldb: yes, but listener combines both the repl and the command processor (vide clim-listener, slime)
14:47:05
mseddon
looks like a toss up between check-it and cl-quickcheck, do people have any preferences?
21:46:38
remexre
hm, is there a standard function like FIND that returns the cons whose car is the element
0:05:13
Mariaaa
Angel_Feroz(Humbert0@ferozmente.angelical.y.angelicalmente.feroz)- loca de mierda te jodiste te har la vida imposible te ir a buscar y probablemente te desaparezca!!!
0:05:13
Mariaaa
01:45 : Mariaaa 01:38:58 -Angel_Feroz(Humbert0@ferozmente.angelical.y.angelicalmente.feroz)- loca de mierda te jodiste te har la vida imposible te ir a buscar y probablemente te desaparezca!!!
0:16:16
gendl
Hi, I just started using paredit for the first time (after editing common lisp with emacs for 25 years). It seems pretty cool but I should probably read a manual or watch a tutorial - whenever I search for same (even specifying "how to use paredit for common lisp") i'm getting a bunch of nice looking directions on how to use it for clojure.
0:16:52
gendl
that's all well & good and i suppose most of that will apply to CL as well, but is there a nice "paredit for common lisp for dummies" somewhere?