41–50 of 97 posts
This is really cool. So is http://sdf.org . You can get a lifetime Unix (NetBSD) shell account at them for as little as $5, mail, http/gopher hosting, etc. included, and more.
This is really cool. So is http://sdf.org . You can get a lifetime Unix (NetBSD) shell account at them for as little as $5, mail, http/gopher hosting, etc. included, and more.
Oh man that is cool! Now to work out how to get validated considering I live in Australia...
Get a login by sshing to new@sdf.org,then type verify at the command line
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Clojure is what happens when a bunch of Java hackers write a lisp for the JVM"? That sounds "clever", but you should be aware that Hickey developed several Lisps before Clojure and was active in the Common Lisp community in the years leading up to it. Also, some of your statements about Clojure are just incorrect; e.g., Clojure is not wholly lazy.
Well, the laziness yes, thanks for the correction, but much of it was from Clojure's own page about how it is different from other Lisps. And I am aware of Hickey's history. I was trying to provide a summary of the difference in outlook between Clojure and Kawa/ABCL: Clojure is decisively more "java-ey" than either of the others, and very much feels like a lisp for those already familiar with that language, with some…
IMO, most of the things that make early versions of Clojure different from previous Lisps do fall out from the requirement of first-class Java interop and being opinionated about pure data being the Right Way to do multithreaded.
From that point on Clojure is its own thing, and will naturally diverge.
Apart from Clojure (which is not LISP, really), I haven't seen end-user applications written in LISP dialects (I don't think emacs is end-user software). Scheme (and its PLT dialect Racket) was in academia for so long that it literally got "friend-zoned" and has little (read "no") use in the industry. Then again, I expected to see more Common LISP around. Paul Graham really put it right, but I guess any leverage/adva…
What makes Clojure "not LISP"?
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.lisp/Bj8Hx...
Interestingly enough, KMP is on the side of "not lisp" and the thread was started by https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=lisper
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Clojure is what happens when a bunch of Java hackers write a lisp for the JVM"? That sounds "clever", but you should be aware that Hickey developed several Lisps before Clojure and was active in the Common Lisp community in the years leading up to it. Also, some of your statements about Clojure are just incorrect; e.g., Clojure is not wholly lazy.
Well, the laziness yes, thanks for the correction, but much of it was from Clojure's own page about how it is different from other Lisps. And I am aware of Hickey's history. I was trying to provide a summary of the difference in outlook between Clojure and Kawa/ABCL: Clojure is decisively more "java-ey" than either of the others, and very much feels like a lisp for those already familiar with that language, with some…
Note that this says nothing about their usefulness for developing software.
This is really cool. So is http://sdf.org . You can get a lifetime Unix (NetBSD) shell account at them for as little as $5, mail, http/gopher hosting, etc. included, and more.
The donate button on sdf.org seems to fail unfortunately. It'd be fantastic if I could get in, as I've been looking for something like this since bur.st closed down.
Apart from Clojure (which is not LISP, really), I haven't seen end-user applications written in LISP dialects (I don't think emacs is end-user software). Scheme (and its PLT dialect Racket) was in academia for so long that it literally got "friend-zoned" and has little (read "no") use in the industry. Then again, I expected to see more Common LISP around. Paul Graham really put it right, but I guess any leverage/adva…
Apart from Clojure (which is not LISP, really), I haven't seen end-user applications written in LISP dialects (I don't think emacs is end-user software). Scheme (and its PLT dialect Racket) was in academia for so long that it literally got "friend-zoned" and has little (read "no") use in the industry. Then again, I expected to see more Common LISP around. Paul Graham really put it right, but I guess any leverage/adva…
Apart from Clojure (which is not LISP, really), I haven't seen end-user applications written in LISP dialects (I don't think emacs is end-user software). Scheme (and its PLT dialect Racket) was in academia for so long that it literally got "friend-zoned" and has little (read "no") use in the industry. Then again, I expected to see more Common LISP around. Paul Graham really put it right, but I guess any leverage/adva…
I've made this comment before, and I don't intend it to be flippant, but am honestly curious. If Common Lisp is a failure, how is it that there are multiple commercial offerings for it?[0][1] I would take the continued presence of these commercial offerings as a sign of health in the Common Lisp ecosystem. [0] http://franz.com/products/allegro-common-lisp/ [1] http://www.lispworks.com/
Well, one possible explanation is that they were sufficiently popular at one point that codebases were built that are large enough to need maintaining but too large to justify re-writing.
I haven't had that experience with a Common Lisp implementation but I have with Smalltalk, Cobol and System-W (although the latter was eventually replaced at considerable expense).
Obviously, that argument fails if the commercial offerings are relatively new and not updates of old implementations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've made this comment before, and I don't intend it to be flippant, but am honestly curious. If Common Lisp is a failure, how is it that there are multiple commercial offerings for it?[0][1] I would take the continued presence of these commercial offerings as a sign of health in the Common Lisp ecosystem. [0] http://franz.com/products/allegro-common-lisp/ [1] http://www.lispworks.com/
What you see on-line is mostly the fashion part of the IT industry. Common Lisp is alive and kicking, but it's not fashionable (except maybe as a counterculture). There are many more stories like that. I was surprised to learn that Delphi is alive and well, and people earn their bread with it writing applications for various industries.