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

Emacs-like editors written in Common Lisp

cliki.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 78 posts

Re: Emacs-like editors written in Common Lisp

#21

Post by vindarel »

It is missing the Lem editor, that works for CL out of the box but also for more languages (Python, Rust, Go, Java, Dart, Nim, HTML… and a directory, markdown, SQL, shell… mode). https://github.com/lem-project/lem/ It works on the terminal and in an experimental Electron front-end. More are in the works. It lacks docstrings and documentation, but its gitter chat is somewhat active and different people showed interest in helping. It has a Vim layer.

It is an easy to install CL editor and REPL, so it's worth checking out for newcomers, it can help.

https://lispcookbook.github.io/cl-cookbook/editor-support.ht...

Re: Emacs-like editors written in Common Lisp

#22

Post by djha-skin »

pvinis wrote: post #4

I'm really curious: do people consider common lisp to be the go-to lisp today? if yes, that's awesome, I'll look into it. if no, what is the go-to? and is there an emacs-like using that lisp?

I have used Clojure on and off for probably 7 years. But when I tried to distribute my program which was a CLI tool, it proved incredibly painful. Clojure startup time is really bad over a second in the best case and it gets worse the more libraries you include. This is not a problem if you are writing a web application, but it's terrible for command line applications. The community seems thoroughly disinterested in solving this problem except with graalvm's native-image. I've done that route and believe me it's so painful.

Common Lisp has everything Clojure has. It feels like Rich Hickie took everything that he liked about Common Lisp and put it into Clojure. Many of the functions in Clojure were basically copied from Common Lisp: if-let, conj(oin), disj(oin) are some examples of core Clojure functions and macros that were totally stolen from Alexandria.

Even better, most CL implementations can save directly to an executable file. Embeddable Common Lisp is my favorite because its executable files are measured in kilobytes, something I could never do with native-image. And the startup time is amazing.

I did look at other lisp languages when deciding to move away from Clojure. However, Racket's standalone executables (raco exe) include the interpreter, and so are huge; Chez Scheme's ecosystem doesn't have a YAML library as far as I can tell, ditto for Chicken. Also scheme's library ecosystem in general (sans racket) is a bit lacking to me.

Common Lisp it is. It has its warts, but they're not too bad. It's long history also speaks of stability though. SBCL is crazy good optimized.

Re: Emacs-like editors written in Common Lisp

#23

Post by vindarel »

tmtvl wrote: post #2

It's nice to see more Emacsen, though without something like eglot or lsp-mode I don't think they'll really take off. That said, I am very fond of the undo-tree package for Emacs and I doubt I could switch to any editor that doesn't have something similar.

Lem uses its LSP mode. https://github.com/lem-project/lem/ (don't know much more, maybe it is that one (same author) https://github.com/cxxxr/cl-lsp)

(edit: there's also https://github.com/nobody-famous/alive-lsp/ that is built for the Alive extension that brings great CL support to VSCode (usable but in the works right now).

Re: Emacs-like editors written in Common Lisp

#25

Post by natrys »

pvinis wrote: post #4

I'm really curious: do people consider common lisp to be the go-to lisp today? if yes, that's awesome, I'll look into it. if no, what is the go-to? and is there an emacs-like using that lisp?

If common lisp is the go-to Lisp, that's a sad indictment of Lisp itself. By commit counts in Github in first quarter of 2022, it doesn't even break into top 50 languages [1]. Surely a flawed metric, but it's damning when you have Elisp - configuration language for a freaking text editor - at #25, and Clojure at #28.

[1] https://madnight.github.io/githut/#/pushes/2022/1

Re: Emacs-like editors written in Common Lisp

#26

Post by tmtvl »

vindarel wrote: post #23
tmtvl wrote: post #2

It's nice to see more Emacsen, though without something like eglot or lsp-mode I don't think they'll really take off. That said, I am very fond of the undo-tree package for Emacs and I doubt I could switch to any editor that doesn't have something similar.

Lem uses its LSP mode. https://github.com/lem-project/lem/ (don't know much more, maybe it is that one (same author) https://github.com/cxxxr/cl-lsp ) (edit: there's also https://github.com/nobody-famous/alive-lsp/ that is built for the Alive extension that brings great CL support to VSCode (usable but in the works right now).

Neat, I'll keep an eye on Lem, thank you for bringing it to my attention!

Re: Emacs-like editors written in Common Lisp

#27

Post by forgotpwd16 »

natrys wrote: post #25
pvinis wrote: post #4

I'm really curious: do people consider common lisp to be the go-to lisp today? if yes, that's awesome, I'll look into it. if no, what is the go-to? and is there an emacs-like using that lisp?

If common lisp is the go-to Lisp, that's a sad indictment of Lisp itself. By commit counts in Github in first quarter of 2022, it doesn't even break into top 50 languages [1]. Surely a flawed metric, but it's damning when you have Elisp - configuration language for a freaking text editor - at #25, and Clojure at #28. [1] https://madnight.github.io/githut/#/pushes/2022/1

Thing is you don't have an alternative for ELisp. If you want to configure or/and extend Emacs, you've to use it. Common Lisp doesn't have such a strong connection to any platform. Nevertheless checking the list it comes as a surprise that languages like Smalltalk, Erlang, Groovy, Lean (a freaking theorem prover) are in but not Common Lisp.

Re: Emacs-like editors written in Common Lisp

#28

Post by agumonkey »

pvinis wrote: post #4

I'm really curious: do people consider common lisp to be the go-to lisp today? if yes, that's awesome, I'll look into it. if no, what is the go-to? and is there an emacs-like using that lisp?

Making a step aside but the nyxt browser is built on commonlisp and gives an emacs UX for browsing + hackability. It's not an editor but it's a recent user programmable common lisp system. And who knows, maybe they'll embed a live editor in it.

Re: Emacs-like editors written in Common Lisp

#29

Post by ducktective »

djha-skin wrote: post #22
pvinis wrote: post #4

I'm really curious: do people consider common lisp to be the go-to lisp today? if yes, that's awesome, I'll look into it. if no, what is the go-to? and is there an emacs-like using that lisp?

I have used Clojure on and off for probably 7 years. But when I tried to distribute my program which was a CLI tool, it proved incredibly painful. Clojure startup time is really bad over a second in the best case and it gets worse the more libraries you include. This is not a problem if you are writing a web application, but it's terrible for command line applications. The community seems thoroughly disinterested in…

Last I checked, ECL binaries are around ~10-20 MiB (including the shared file) and the price of having these binary sizes is start-up time which is around 500-1000ms.

BTW, since you program professionally in CL, do you use Emacs? Doom or custom?

Re: Emacs-like editors written in Common Lisp

#30

Post by jes »

tmtvl wrote: post #2

It's nice to see more Emacsen, though without something like eglot or lsp-mode I don't think they'll really take off. That said, I am very fond of the undo-tree package for Emacs and I doubt I could switch to any editor that doesn't have something similar.

I have used Emacs for decades and TIL about undo-tree. Thank you!
Post reply on HN