31–40 of 53 posts
I love the concept - is there anything like this for Python?
Folks looking for a practical place to start with Lisp should consider using the Emacs editor. I just recently went down this road myself. I am now a huge fan. For about 6 months in 2006 I made Emacs my default editor. (Xemacs, actually). But I did not learn Lisp, at that time, and there are other IDE's out there that have a nicer GUI. So I started using simple text editors like Kate, and then sometimes NetBeans. And…
Is this going to be using Lisp bindings for cross-platform graphics libraries like SDL? ( http://code.google.com/p/lispbuilder/wiki/LispbuilderSDL ) Here's to hoping you get to build 2D/3D games and not 1970s style terminal games you will never show anyone.
The sample chapter that is linked elsewhere uses a graph drawing library that produces png representations of the game state. (This actually builds on the material of a previous chapter, wherein you develop the graph->png utility.)
This is from the perspective of someone who hasn't yet bought the book. I really need to get to that.
Folks looking for a practical place to start with Lisp should consider using the Emacs editor. I just recently went down this road myself. I am now a huge fan. For about 6 months in 2006 I made Emacs my default editor. (Xemacs, actually). But I did not learn Lisp, at that time, and there are other IDE's out there that have a nicer GUI. So I started using simple text editors like Kate, and then sometimes NetBeans. And…
Dont want to start a religious war here, but how does slimv ( http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=2531 ) for vim compare ?
http://writequit.org/blog/?p=386
I do not know how it compares to Emacs and Slime, but I'm quite satisfied by it.
Why "Lisp" if it is book about "Common Lisp" only? It is misleading.
Folks looking for a practical place to start with Lisp should consider using the Emacs editor. I just recently went down this road myself. I am now a huge fan. For about 6 months in 2006 I made Emacs my default editor. (Xemacs, actually). But I did not learn Lisp, at that time, and there are other IDE's out there that have a nicer GUI. So I started using simple text editors like Kate, and then sometimes NetBeans. And…
Folks looking for a practical place to start with Lisp should consider using the Emacs editor. I just recently went down this road myself. I am now a huge fan. For about 6 months in 2006 I made Emacs my default editor. (Xemacs, actually). But I did not learn Lisp, at that time, and there are other IDE's out there that have a nicer GUI. So I started using simple text editors like Kate, and then sometimes NetBeans. And…
> Those of you who prefer some kind of GUI, look into Xemacs. It can be set up to respond to your mouse-clicks. I don't want to nitpick here, but the tedious distinction between the "graphically challenged" GNU Emacs and the "some kind of GUI" godness of XEmacs is getting rather old. Precisely, it is around 20 years old, since the debate started somwhen at the beginning of the 90s. Much, much time has passed and much…
Emacs still has a relatively poor Lisp dialect, no object-orientation in most of its software, no multi-tasking, a relatively poor user interface and so on.