libera/#commonlisp - IRC Chatlog
Search
5:50:27
semarie
regarding shebang, it could be portability issue with passing more than 1 argument to the interpreter. all arguments could be read as 'one argument' ("arg1 arg2 ...")
5:50:54
semarie
but I don't recall if the limitation comes from posix or from (some) implementations
7:08:03
beach
semarie: By the way, be careful with the word "interpreter". It may lead some people to think that Common Lisp is what they call an "interpreted language", and therefore intrinsically slow.
7:36:00
qhong
Is special variable access in SBCL significantly slower than closure bound lexical variable?
7:37:17
qhong
I'm not sure where I've got this impression before, maybe I was comparing with non-closured-bound lexical variable (which is of course faster). I just did some unscientific tests which found special variable to be *faster*, which is quite surprising
7:39:08
beach
I don't know what SBCL does, but a closed-over lexical variable must be looked up in the static environment, so there is some indirection involved there too.
7:44:46
semz
qhong: If I call the function (let ((foo nil)) (lambda (x) (if x (setf foo x) foo))) (resp. a variant with a special variable *foo*) a billion times I get ~4.3s vs ~4.8s respectively
7:45:01
semz
whether that is significant to you i don't know, but i suspect you may be measuring noise
12:06:42
flip214
Help, please. https://paste.debian.net/hidden/ce25a230/ -- Why is the argument lost? SBCL just relays POSITION, but POSITION-SPEC is NIL?
12:15:34
_death
NIL is not a file position designator.. looks like a bug https://github.com/j3pic/lisp-binary/blob/master/simple-bit-stream.lisp#L385
13:04:42
jackdaniel
sbcl: #\rubout 127 #\delete 127 #\backspace 8; ccl: #\rubout 127 #\backspace 8 #\delete 8; not especially amusing
13:43:15
ecraven
hm.. does anyone use sbcl + swank in k8s containers, allowing connection and debugging right into running pods?