[dead]
Common Lisp Implementations in 2023
101–110 of 243 posts
Re: Common Lisp Implementations in 2023
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
The commercial aspect is not a problem in my opinion (but again english is not my main language so I might have conveyed the wrong tone). The issue is the pricing model which may work for established company ready to invest money from the start, but is simply out of touch with independant developers and small companies exploring the possibility of using Common Lisp. Open sourcing Lispworks and selling support contrac…
I assume you have some specific needs that couldn't be handled by open source Lisps like SBCL, CCL, etc?
No, his needs are probably better handled by Java or .NET or Go or whatever. And that's how Lisp atrophies. The complaint is a valid one.
Re: Common Lisp Implementations in 2023
#103I always like seeing Common Lisp links, but personally I was a bit put off by the very strong anti-commercial comments about LispWorks and Franz. I had a business idea requiring Common Lisp a few years ago and I purchased a LispWorks Professional license. Small standalone executables with a tree shaker [1] and I has received very good support without paying for the high priority support service. I also paid the maint…
He's right, though.
If I'm a somewhat polyglot developer ambivalent to any language out there, why would I pay those licensing costs when I can just go elsewhere instead?
That's what regular devs do, they don't even bother writing articles or commenting on HN :-)
Re: Common Lisp Implementations in 2023
#104Are there any serious attempts at reworking the Common Lisp standard for more modern problems? I know the space is active, but when I see the old bright yellow CLHS linked to from documentation sites, I just frown a bit. The Lisp community very nearly goes out of its way to be unhospitable to the younger generation of coders, and downright dismissive of modern techniques like containers and DevOps practices. Not that…
re CLHS, there is a new rendering, much more welcoming and practical! https://cl-community-spec.github.io/pages/index.html (a search box, syntax highlighting!!)
Indeed, that is VERY nice! That's exactly the type of upgrade I bet a lot of people can appreciate. The search is particularly crisp, feels instantaneous.
Re: Common Lisp Implementations in 2023
#105I just spent months working on a large piece of software and could say without a doubt, Lisp is awesome! But I also want to say that most implementations are hashing out a spec written decades ago and not trying to improve what's obviously lacking -- a full modern standard library! Trying to piece together functionality from here and there (and Quicklisp which is an unversioned mess) will only take you so far and in…
> and Quicklisp which is an unversioned mess
Quicklisp is the Common Lisp package manager from what I remember. It doesn't version its packages?
Re: Common Lisp Implementations in 2023
#106[dead]
Re: Common Lisp Implementations in 2023
#107I would like to learn Lisp but am easily confused with where to start. What implementation do I use? On a general level do I start with CL, schema, racket, etc (apologies I know this thread is about common lisp). It's all very confusing. I'm like this with most things, like I want to learn Forth too but have that same problem. I learned vanilla JavaScript because I didn't know where to start with the 1000+ frameworks…
In my opinion, the simplest way is to start with Common Lisp, with SBCL and the Practical Common Lisp book by Peter Seibel. Make sure you are comfortable with Emacs. It is possible to write Common Lisp without it, but Emacs and SLIME are so much better than anything else it feels like cheating.
I will say, using VLIME with vim is pretty nice as well. Once you get the keys memorized, you mostly match an Emacs/SLIME experience.
Re: Common Lisp Implementations in 2023
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The issue is the pricing model which may work for established company ready to invest money from the start, but ... That's a much more nuanced way to put it - compared to "The professional and enterprise licenses do not really make sense for anyone".
> That's a much more nuanced way to put it - compared to "The professional and enterprise licenses do not really make sense for anyone". Where does he say that?
Re: Common Lisp Implementations in 2023
#109There's a weird spike in new accounts with what appear to be AI generated comments in this thread. One problem I run into when learning Common Lisp is ASDF. For some reason I can't figure out how to use it properly. For example, when I open a system definition in a new REPL, what's the expected workflow? I'm using emacs and slime by the way. Maybe my environment is set up wrong. I also have to prefix the `defsystem`s…
>There's a weird spike in new accounts with what appear to be AI generated comments in this thread.
There's also a chatbot company on the front page posted by a new account. I kinda suspect they're related.
Re: Common Lisp Implementations in 2023
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The issue is the pricing model which may work for established company ready to invest money from the start, but ... That's a much more nuanced way to put it - compared to "The professional and enterprise licenses do not really make sense for anyone".
> That's a much more nuanced way to put it - compared to "The professional and enterprise licenses do not really make sense for anyone". Where does he say that?
On the page, commenting about LispWorks.