libera/#lisp - IRC Chatlog
Search
10:07:49
wasamasa
> I also wonder about why this is the case with Common Lisp. My understanding is that there were a number of lisps and standardization was meant to unify them. Maybe to some people this standardization process means that it’s the heir to the throne and therefore the one true Lisp of lore. To me, it means the opposite: it’s yet another lisp.
11:07:16
pjb
wasamasa: Have a look at (intersection common-lisp emacs-lisp scheme) http://www.informatimago.com/develop/lisp/com/informatimago/small-cl-pgms/intersection-r5rs-common-lisp-emacs-lisp/
11:09:25
pjb
wasamasa: it would have been nice if all other lisps had indeed moved toward CL so that conforming CL code could be loaded and run.
11:09:54
pjb
But what we observe, is that it's in general easier to load other lisps into CL (with a few macros and glue).
11:10:14
pjb
an example is http://informatimago.com/develop/lisp/com/informatimago/small-cl-pgms/wang.html
11:11:37
wasamasa
for some reason this reminds me of the argument how one can construct a programming language by hacking the CL reader
12:30:53
amirouche
nah the best lisp is kernel, but the most practical lisp is chez, but CL has great interactive machinery.
12:38:30
jackdaniel
you can't make it without call/cc neither (if you stick to the letter of the standard), yet it is not always present in scheme implementations
12:39:26
jackdaniel
regarding "necessity" of some language feature - it is subjective. if you don't feel a need for it then it is not necessary for you, is it?
12:44:43
amirouche
so sometime you even know something better but you do not know it is better like in my case of CL-interactivity
13:09:05
dieggsy
wasamasa: "in practice people use racket instead" (or clojure) about sums up the state of any given lisp lol.
13:10:33
jackdaniel
they are more popular in general awarness terms but there are successful commercial setting with common lisp
13:11:09
dieggsy
jackdaniel: as someone paid to work with common lisp, i still think it holds some truth
13:11:50
dieggsy
it's a generalization, but when you look broadly at what people are using, especially anyone who's newly adopting a lisp for x or y company
13:12:48
jackdaniel
I've agreed that from the general awarness perspective cl loses to both racket and clojure, I'm just saying that "in practice people use <x>" is pessimistic oversimplification
13:13:00
mfiano
For a brief period of time (it's all I could stand lol) those other languages also included Scheme and Clojure.
13:13:40
jackdaniel
if we take gross values, people use nothing else than c, c++ and java (you may add your favourite language of the day there, like go)
13:14:48
dieggsy
sure, but generalizations aren't useless, and can provide some insight. i could more accurately have said "more people use these". i mean the same thing
13:15:34
jackdaniel
dieggsy: I believe that words shape reality. if you say "in practice people (by inversion) don't use common lisp" then it means, that the language is practically abandoned, and that is not true
13:16:38
jackdaniel
so saying "most people use" and saying "practically all people use" have definetely a different flavour of meaning
13:17:40
contrapunctus
jackdaniel: both of those really only ever mean..."nobody I know <does X>" or "I've never seen anyone <do X>"
13:18:03
dieggsy
jackdaniel: I agree that words shape reality, but I don't think all words are meant to be literal to the T. we can agree to disagree I suppose. In any case, my favorite lisp is chicken scheme, we're an even smaller community lol
13:18:07
jackdaniel
contrapunctus: and do you believe that any of these statements holds true on this channel?
13:18:37
dieggsy
contrapunctus: i disagree with this point, because I've seen plenty of people do X, being one of them myself. so that's certainly not what I meant.
13:18:40
wasamasa
I based that observation on reader macros being a far worse tool for designing a language than racket's language construction macros
13:18:59
wasamasa
it's like using a hammer for all construction work in a house vs using a box of tools
13:19:29
contrapunctus
jackdaniel: A different way might be to say "X language ranks Y on Z Popularity Index" (but now we're talking about Z Index, not about a person's observations; note how in both cases there's no general, universal, objective fact.)
13:19:36
jackdaniel
dieggsy: ever since I've started programming with lisp I hear on regular basis opinions that the language is "practically dead" and looking at the activity it is far from truth
13:20:20
jackdaniel
either way, I have nothing more to say except from recirculating what I've said above :) so rince repeat! ;p
13:20:48
dieggsy
wasamasa right, and i further generalized your statement, rather meant in a bit of a humorous matter, but oh well lol.
13:21:43
wasamasa
guile is another one with language construction features, but it's seen far less use
13:36:35
hjudt
with loop, is there a way to collect directly into a string? ex (loop for c across "abcdecfg" when (char= c #\c) collect c into s finally (return s))
13:38:38
jackdaniel
either finally (return (coerce s 'string)) or keep the iterator and `do (setf (aref s i) c)` ; loop collect is not so nice
13:39:03
jackdaniel
otoh the macro collect (part of cmu utilities) is capable of accepting the collector function