libera/#commonlisp - IRC Chatlog
Search
4:16:46
semz
phantomics: A program that relies on this exact behavior sounds misdesigned to me, the same way a program using exact FP comparisons would.
4:18:11
phantomics
It also has a tendency to lock up a lot during intensive April computations, maybe it's a problem with the multithreading
4:22:12
phantomics
ECL sometimes locks up once or twice when doing the intensive demo test suite, but LW locks up a dozen times or so needing manual restarts. SBCL, CCL, and ABCL get through it fine.
4:23:24
beach
I think you should report it to LispWorks. I am sure they will appreciate the feedback.
4:27:15
beach
I don't think so. Martin Simmons seems like a very reasonable person. At least when we have diner together at ELS. :)
6:31:36
White_Flame
phantomics: CLHS says that "a floating point approximation might result" for anything but (expt <rational> <integer>)
7:49:56
jackdaniel
n.b I'm not "a fan of stable things" - most notably I'm not that cool (a pun towards the word "fan"), but changing stable apis breaks existing code - mind that no common lisp implementation changed nth argument order to match elt, even if someone could have thought that it is a good idea :)
7:51:03
jackdaniel
or that changing the interface of with-output-to-presentation in a non-backward compatible way would break many preexisting clim applications
8:06:03
beach
jackdaniel: It would be much easier to parse what you wrote if you would capitalize NTH, ELT, API, and CLIM.
11:25:08
pjb
jackdaniel: beach: would I suggest to use instead 𝐧𝐭𝐡, 𝐞𝐥𝐭, 𝐀𝐏𝐈, 𝐂𝐋𝐈𝐌, given the flame you can get when using upper case?
13:16:29
pdietz
phantomics: in SBCL, expt will sometimes give different results on the same arguments depending on whether they appear as variables or constants in the form.
15:10:45
AndrewYu
Hey there- I'm here to ask: How feasible would it be to create a Lisp dialect that's as powerful as common lisp, but slightly more elegant (like towards Scheme). An example would be cleaning up the eq equal = eql mess. I'm pretty new, so I'm not sure how many of those pragmatic/syntax comprimises there are. I'd appreciate somehow a list of those weird comprimises. Thanks!
15:13:36
jackdaniel
AndrewYu: equality is a hard problem :) regarding question of how to make something as powerful as common lisp but more elegant (i.e more tailored for your taste), create a separate package that doesn't USE the package CL and define your own abstractions
15:14:48
frgo
I do have a question myself. Anybody have a readily running c2ffi (from https://github.com/rpav/c2ffi) on macOS Monterey? (I'm having issues with building it on Monterey and, well, yak shaving ...)
15:15:45
jackdaniel
AndrewYu: if you look for a different lisp somewhere between scheme and common lisp take a look at eulisp, afaik it has around three implementations, perhaps they even build
15:45:40
pjb
AndrewYu: it wouldn't be too difficult: it's already done. It's called ISO Lisp. There are several implementations. http://christian.jullien.free.fr http://www.islisp.org https://github.com/sasagawa888/eisl etc.
15:49:25
jcowan
"ISLISP" means "IS LISP". There never has been, and by McCarthy's will never will be, a standard or implementation called just "Lisp" (the Scheme community extends that to "Scheme")
15:53:54
jcowan
But that doesn't change the public world. It is no secret that many U.S. diplomats abroad are spies. But for the U.S. Government to announce "Many of our diplomats abroad are spies" would change the public world hugely. See also the jealous husbands who all shoot their wives on day N after a newcomer arrives, where N = number of jealous husbands.
15:57:30
jcowan
With every day that passes and no wife shot (that never happens without proof), public knowledge grows, and eventually each husband knows that his wife (and all others) have been adulterous, so they are all shot on the same day
15:58:13
jackdaniel
I don't understand, but I have a strong suspiction that it is (pick at least one) 1) nonsense, 2) offtopic
16:00:38
beach
AndrewYu: Your premise is wrong. The equality thing is not a mess. It exists pretty much by necessity, as the page by Kent Pitman explains. The fact that you recognize that you are new, should also perhaps indicate that what you consider "weird compromises" may in fact exit for good reasons.
16:04:26
Guest74
it seems any time I try and ask questions related to developing a stable api I get no feedback. I guess I might be weird in trying to develop a comfortable stable api first instead of not changing an api so that it remains stable.
16:05:01
jcowan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induction_puzzles doesn't explain this particular puzzles, but the rest on that page are all of the same type.
16:05:37
jackdaniel
I'm not sure how many questions and where you have asked but I agree that starting with an API and only after then implementing is not a good idea unless you have specification
16:06:07
Guest74
I'm a big fan of not writing a specification until you have something that works nicely.
16:07:41
jcowan
I think almost the opposite: write a spec followed by tests and code, and be prepared to change any of them as you go. At the end they should all agree (modulo inevitable bugs).
16:09:04
jcowan
I always tell someone implementing one of my specs to complain if something is too hard or Just Wrong, because the fault is most likely in the spec.
16:10:46
Guest74
i would think the first part of writing a spec would be getting feedback from people in the field, as was done with the common lisp spec.
16:13:49
_death
you start with something instable and use it in diverse contexts, each time changing it to fit while keeping other desiderata.. with such use, it may become more stable.. writing documentation or tests help because these are very different contexts of "use"