libera/#commonlisp - IRC Chatlog
Search
20:08:29
foxfromabyss
1) is it possible to extend existing methods(?), such as `+` or `eq` for new classes, without jumping through too many hoops?
20:08:29
foxfromabyss
2) let's say I have 2 classes. Class A and Class B. Class B has a field with value of Class A. I have written a comparator for Class A. Is it possible to piggyback on that comparator for `sort`?
20:11:13
pjb
foxfromabyss: yes: (shadow '+) (defgeneric + (a b)) (defmethod + (a b) (cl:+ a b )) (defmethod + ((a string) (b string)) (+ (parse-integer a) (parse-integer b)))
20:12:42
foxfromabyss
too many hoops is just me being lazy, and shadowing feels like smth that would break a lot of stuff, but maybe not
20:13:54
foxfromabyss
unrelated, is there an example somewhere of how people use SLIME/SLY? So far i've been just pasting stuff from the source file and testing it there, but it feels like I am underutilizing a lot of features
20:18:51
contrapunctus
foxfromabyss: `M-x slime` -> `(ql:quickload :my-project)` -> edit code in buffer -> `M-x slime-eval-defun`
20:20:38
pjb
foxfromabyss: you can avoid shadowing, by using symbols with a different name: (defgeneric plus (a b)) …
20:25:45
frodef
Hi all, is there some package that provides a compatibility layer for the MOP? Such that I can call e.g. sb-mop:class-slots without relying explicitly on sbcl/sb-mop ?
20:27:00
jackdaniel
c2cl supplements implementation-specified operators like defmethod with wrappers when the implementation doesn't implement fully the mop protocol and that can be fixed with a wrapper
22:01:29
yottabyte
why would one use flat instead of let? you can define functions (lambdas) with let, no?
22:03:03
semz
If you define a function with (let ((f (lambda ...))) ...) you have to call it with (funcall f ...) rather than being able to use (f ...)
1:22:12
Bike
https://plaster.tymoon.eu/view/2874#2874 can i get a sanity check here? sbcl gives me a type warning about this, but I don't see the problem
1:31:03
moon-child
perhaps it is assuming that CONS might be nil? Obviously that can never happen, but
1:56:42
lagash
What do folks here use for a linter/code formatter for CL, particularly as a pre-commit hook?
1:57:23
moon-child
pre-commit hooked autoformat is dumb. Formatting can not always be applied automatically
1:59:13
moon-child
mfiano: it also depends on the smarts of the formatter. Slime still can not indent moderately complex loops
2:00:03
lagash
mfiano: I have been using Sly, although come to think of it, not every time I've formatted my CL code, was Sly running.. that might be the issue?
2:00:19
mfiano
Stemming from its piggy-backing off of emacs-lisp, which does not have the concept of packages.
2:01:25
mfiano
Sly can indent moderately complex LOOPs just fine though, so I'm not sure about SLIME in this regard.
2:02:13
mfiano
I have written hundreds of line loops before, and indentation has never been an issue.
2:02:18
EdLangley[m]
Because, even if the formatting isn’t always great, it reduces diffs if you apply it consistently
2:02:26
lagash
It's just that Emacs and/or Sly can't seem to make up its mind when I, say, format an entire file..
2:04:25
mfiano
I also use aggressive-indent-mode, but should point out that the code and its dependencies should also be loaded; it isn't enough to just have SLIME/SLY running due to macro definitions.
2:05:19
lagash
mfiano: so depending on if I had Sly running or had the code loaded or whatnot, Emacs might format things differently?
2:06:42
EdLangley[m]
SLIME/Sly indentation is based on introspection of function and macro information