Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Practical Common Lisp (2009)

gigamonkeys.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 91 posts

Re: Practical Common Lisp (2009)

#21

Post by [deleted] »

armitron wrote: post #13
m0skit0 wrote: post #10

Can anyone please comment what advantages and short-comings Common LISP has over "modern LISP" (i.e. Clojure)?

(Mostly talking about SBCL) Mature native code compilation (including runtime assembler), type declarations that lead to optimizations in generated code, SBCL compiler can use declared types for compile-time type checks, read/compiler macros, extremely easy interface to C (JNI is a pain in the ass), multi-paradigm and doesn't prematurely optimize like Clojure (I have no need for STM or immutable data structures in 99…

[deleted]

Re: Practical Common Lisp (2009)

#22

Post by [deleted] »

armitron wrote: post #13
m0skit0 wrote: post #10

Can anyone please comment what advantages and short-comings Common LISP has over "modern LISP" (i.e. Clojure)?

(Mostly talking about SBCL) Mature native code compilation (including runtime assembler), type declarations that lead to optimizations in generated code, SBCL compiler can use declared types for compile-time type checks, read/compiler macros, extremely easy interface to C (JNI is a pain in the ass), multi-paradigm and doesn't prematurely optimize like Clojure (I have no need for STM or immutable data structures in 99…

[deleted]

Re: Practical Common Lisp (2009)

#23

Post by lilactown »

armitron wrote: post #13
m0skit0 wrote: post #10

Can anyone please comment what advantages and short-comings Common LISP has over "modern LISP" (i.e. Clojure)?

(Mostly talking about SBCL) Mature native code compilation (including runtime assembler), type declarations that lead to optimizations in generated code, SBCL compiler can use declared types for compile-time type checks, read/compiler macros, extremely easy interface to C (JNI is a pain in the ass), multi-paradigm and doesn't prematurely optimize like Clojure (I have no need for STM or immutable data structures in 99…

Clojure was my first lisp; I use it every day at work, especially on JavaScript. ;) The (semi-)joke is that the reason Clojure targets the JVM and JS runtimes is so we can get paid to write it.

However, I have started playing with Lisp (SBCL) a bit in my off time and am finding it interesting. I have a desire to write some CLI applications and think Lisp might be a better fit than Clojure. I was drawn to it for a lot of the reasons you note:

1. Native compilation

2. Reader macros

3. C FFI

4. Debugger

But it's also a bit like learning how to write with my left hand; my brain has been warped by Clojure to eschew place-oriented development and reduce mutability to a pinpoint. Lisp is completely, unabashedly mutable (which gives a lot of room for improved performance vs. immutable) and I'm struggling with it.

Re: Practical Common Lisp (2009)

#24

Post by grblovrflowerrr »

tosh wrote: post #5
Areading314 wrote: post #4

This is a great book, but the subject of dealing with mp3s looks painfully dated.

I wonder what would be a great replacement topic nowadays. Ruby on Rails era was the blog in 5 minutes. What is "the project" now?

For front-end the community seems to have landed todo lists as "the project".

Re: Practical Common Lisp (2009)

#25

Post by grovehaw »

lilactown wrote: post #23
armitron wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Mostly talking about SBCL) Mature native code compilation (including runtime assembler), type declarations that lead to optimizations in generated code, SBCL compiler can use declared types for compile-time type checks, read/compiler macros, extremely easy interface to C (JNI is a pain in the ass), multi-paradigm and doesn't prematurely optimize like Clojure (I have no need for STM or immutable data structures in 99…

Clojure was my first lisp; I use it every day at work, especially on JavaScript. ;) The (semi-)joke is that the reason Clojure targets the JVM and JS runtimes is so we can get paid to write it. However, I have started playing with Lisp (SBCL) a bit in my off time and am finding it interesting. I have a desire to write some CLI applications and think Lisp might be a better fit than Clojure. I was drawn to it for a lot…

One way to use Common Lisp with a more immutable flavour is to use the folio2 library.[0]

I have enjoyed exploring it a great deal. The project's readme, explains it better than I can:

"folio 2 is a collection of small libraries that provide support for functional idioms and data structures in Common Lisp and a common set of APIs for working with them.

"It's a direct descendant of the older and simpler folio library, with a greatly expanded and reorganized API, and support for more data structures and procedures.

[0] https://github.com/mikelevins/folio2

Re: Practical Common Lisp (2009)

#26

Post by ScottBurson »

lilactown wrote: post #23
armitron wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Mostly talking about SBCL) Mature native code compilation (including runtime assembler), type declarations that lead to optimizations in generated code, SBCL compiler can use declared types for compile-time type checks, read/compiler macros, extremely easy interface to C (JNI is a pain in the ass), multi-paradigm and doesn't prematurely optimize like Clojure (I have no need for STM or immutable data structures in 99…

Clojure was my first lisp; I use it every day at work, especially on JavaScript. ;) The (semi-)joke is that the reason Clojure targets the JVM and JS runtimes is so we can get paid to write it. However, I have started playing with Lisp (SBCL) a bit in my off time and am finding it interesting. I have a desire to write some CLI applications and think Lisp might be a better fit than Clojure. I was drawn to it for a lot…

If you want to use functional (immutable) collections in Common Lisp, try FSet [0]. (It's QuickLisp-loadable.) FSet greatly expands the space of programs that can naturally be written in a functional style in CL.

[0] https://github.com/slburson/fset

Re: Practical Common Lisp (2009)

#27

Post by justinhj »

m0skit0 wrote: post #10

Can anyone please comment what advantages and short-comings Common LISP has over "modern LISP" (i.e. Clojure)?

Common Lisp has the advantage of being much more stable in terms of language changes. You can pretty much take CL code from the last two decades and run it. It's also got a better native compilation story.

I like Clojure for bringing maps and vectors into first class language constructs with simple syntax and the fact that it runs on the JVM means I have access to the entire Java ecosystem of libraries and tools.

Re: Practical Common Lisp (2009)

#29

Post by lispm »

justinhj wrote: post #27
m0skit0 wrote: post #10

Can anyone please comment what advantages and short-comings Common LISP has over "modern LISP" (i.e. Clojure)?

Common Lisp has the advantage of being much more stable in terms of language changes. You can pretty much take CL code from the last two decades and run it. It's also got a better native compilation story. I like Clojure for bringing maps and vectors into first class language constructs with simple syntax and the fact that it runs on the JVM means I have access to the entire Java ecosystem of libraries and tools.

I wonder where the vector myth comes from. Common Lisp always had a vector data type and syntax for it. Just not [], but #(). Actually Common Lisp has multi-dimensional arrays, bitvectors, ...

Vector:

  CL-USER 102 > (map 'vector #'char-code "foobar")
  #(102 111 111 98 97 114)

  CL-USER 103 > (reduce #'+ #(102 111 111 98 97 114))
  633
Bitvector:

  CL-USER 105 > (reduce #'+ #*10101001010101)
  7
2d-Array

  CL-USER 106 > (aref #2a((1 2) (3 4)) 1 1)
  4

Re: Practical Common Lisp (2009)

#30

Post by lilactown »

ScottBurson wrote: post #26
lilactown wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clojure was my first lisp; I use it every day at work, especially on JavaScript. ;) The (semi-)joke is that the reason Clojure targets the JVM and JS runtimes is so we can get paid to write it. However, I have started playing with Lisp (SBCL) a bit in my off time and am finding it interesting. I have a desire to write some CLI applications and think Lisp might be a better fit than Clojure. I was drawn to it for a lot…

If you want to use functional (immutable) collections in Common Lisp, try FSet [0]. (It's QuickLisp-loadable.) FSet greatly expands the space of programs that can naturally be written in a functional style in CL. [0] https://github.com/slburson/fset

I have looked heavily at FSet :). I'm at a cross roads now with whether I try and push the Lisp block into the Clojure hole in my brain, or whether I should try and learn Lisp as it is and it's idioms.

FSet is really cool and I'll probably end up using it in conjunction with https://github.com/fiddlerwoaroof/cl-edn

Post reply on HN