libera/#commonlisp - IRC Chatlog
Search
22:06:30
jmercouris
anyone know of any attempts to create a 'visual' programming interface for lisp?
22:07:08
jmercouris
of course it would be a new language, but borrowing as many concepts from lisp as possible
22:10:59
jmercouris
this looks really intense, I think I could tone it down and provide some of the same concepts more approachable for beginners
22:44:02
hendursaga
jmercouris: blockly is pretty good, although you'd want to wrap it some, it's pretty old JS
22:47:18
luis
There's one such library where you can switch between text and blocks seamlessly. I forget its name
7:42:00
beach
rdrg109: Do you have any particular reason for using GNU CLISP over other implementations?
8:59:46
susam
By the way, I still keep CLISP around because (1) nostalgia (2) testing out if some implementation-dependent behaviour behaves differently with CLISP. That is, SBCL as the primary implementation and CLISP to test out my programs to weed out any bad habits of writing implementation-dependent code.
9:31:43
kakuhen
i became really angry when doing this for a certain cl project because a bunch of really really simple functions that reinvented already-existing functions in the CL spec were using sbcl extensions
9:33:25
kakuhen
but after patching out that mess... i am now just angry at one thing: every CL implementation seems to have its own posix interface and export symbols for errors and signals, but neither uiop nor osicat-posix have decided to have wrappers for this
9:34:21
susam
kakuhen: Any example you can remember? I am trying to understand why a function in CL spec would use sbcl extension and even if it did why it would matter as long as it conforms to the spec.