Common Lisp implementations in 2023: - SBCL Everything else is de-facto dead or in a proprietary silo.
/me gasps - how rude! :~)
Thanks for keeping ECL running Daniel!
Common Lisp Implementations in 2023
201–210 of 243 posts
Re: Common Lisp Implementations in 2023
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
Looking at the price of the “Hobbyist DV” version, it is not out of line with what people often spend on hobbies like photography, music, and cycling. Or just on beer and/or wine. Or books. Not to say people don’t spend less on their hobbies, just that a license is a less than a Sony A7R3 or a used Les Paul.
Yes, if a hobbyist absolutely wants to buy a Lispworks license, that should be possible for many people. But that isn't the only criterium. The question is: is anyone as happy to pay the price compared to spend the money on other things, like buying a camera or lens. There is some perception of value involved. For example I do spend a lot of money on my camera equipment and some people are suprised by it, though I sp…
[deleted]
Re: Common Lisp Implementations in 2023
#203This LispWorks comment on reddit is very interesting: --- [cite] As a Lispworks user, yes it is super pricey, but it does make sense for certain people. Arguably, Lispworks provides features that aren't available in any other programming language, Lisp or not. * Support for just about every platform I can imagine. Yes it's expensive, but if I want to port to a new platform I can pay Lispworks, and get it over with. I…
Pro-tip for SBCL servers: Manually call the GC periodically. All non-FFI related crashes I've had on SBCL servers were allocation failures. They may have squashed all of those bugs now, but I still do this.
Re: Common Lisp Implementations in 2023
#204Earlier quoted context omitted.
what are strengths of sbcl over racket? what are strengths of racket over sbcl? if sbcl raw speed > racket speed wouldn't most expert lispers by default choose sbcl? what purposes does racket uniquely serve not served by sbcl?
> what are strengths of sbcl over racket? SBCL is a Common Lisp implementation, racket implements variants of Scheme. SBCL is natively compiled, creates standalone executables. > what are strengths of racket over sbcl? It implements various scheme dialects, the ability to integrate different languages in one image is unique. It offers an integrated enviroment with a lot of libraries included, that is why it is popula…
is racket not compiled to a native binary like sbcl,c,cpp,haskell?
Re: Common Lisp Implementations in 2023
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
> what are strengths of sbcl over racket? SBCL is a Common Lisp implementation, racket implements variants of Scheme. SBCL is natively compiled, creates standalone executables. > what are strengths of racket over sbcl? It implements various scheme dialects, the ability to integrate different languages in one image is unique. It offers an integrated enviroment with a lot of libraries included, that is why it is popula…
> the ability to integrate different languages in one image is unique Somehow. It should be possible to load a C, Prolog and Python implementations into one sbcl image. The Symbolics Lisp Machine emulator I use comes with C, Pascal, Fortran, several Common Lisp variants, Lisp Machine Lisp in one image. Kalman Reti once gave a demo how to debug mixed Lisp and C code in a REPL on such a Lisp Machine: https://www.youtub…
why is there a need to integrate many different languages in one image? [ in racket/sbcl]
Re: Common Lisp Implementations in 2023
#206Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, it starts at €480 (Linux) - €720 for the Mac for a pure IDE, without the ability to produce executables. You are limited to run your programs inside the development environment, this limits its applicability a lot. You can't write a simple command line utility this way, just to name one example. You cannot give it to a friend etc. The HobbyistDV edition is in my eyes the first really usable one. It is already o…
> The HobbyistDV edition is in my eyes the first really usable one. It is already over €1400 Less than 1000 if you can live with 32 bits but I wonder if someone goes for that option nowadays. > and that is for a single OS, a single CPU architecture. The MacOS version supports both Apple Silicon and Intel.
The macOS version is not available as 32-bit edition so it is twice as expensive as the cheapest 32-bit version.
Also, you are not allowed to give a saved image away / cannot run it without the licensed LispWorks installation.
Re: Common Lisp Implementations in 2023
#207Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The HobbyistDV edition is in my eyes the first really usable one. It is already over €1400 Less than 1000 if you can live with 32 bits but I wonder if someone goes for that option nowadays. > and that is for a single OS, a single CPU architecture. The MacOS version supports both Apple Silicon and Intel.
The macOS version is not available as 32-bit edition so it is twice as expensive as the cheapest 32-bit version. Also, you are not allowed to give a saved image away / cannot run it without the licensed LispWorks installation.
> Also, you are not allowed to give a saved image away / cannot run it without the licensed LispWorks installation.
I think you're not talking now about the HobbyistDV version mentioned in the parent comment, are you?
Re: Common Lisp Implementations in 2023
#208It may be worth mentioning that CLASP is one of the only languages/runtime systems that can interoperate with C++ code directly - say, to catch C++ exceptions, or pass around std::vector and so on. It's also quite remarkable that the project was started by a chemistry researcher.
I used to use ECL a bit, and in hindsight I really wish it emitted C++ rather C, even if the generated code was only using C features.
Re: Common Lisp Implementations in 2023
#209Earlier quoted context omitted.
You quote him saying "The professional and enterprise licenses do not really make sense for anyone" your quote is the definition of "out of context", you left out his colon leading to the rest of his sentence where he explains what he means, i.e. what you are asking. "The professional and enterprise licenses do not really make sense for anyone: you will have to buy separate licenses for every..." ...now, I'm not quot…
Since you're going to be a condescending pendant...everything after the colon is why it doesn't make sense for him , not why it doesn't make sense for anyone , and it's very clear that's the point he's making. It's a common fallacy around here: " I think this, therefore it's applicable to everyone ".
*pedant.
;-)
Re: Common Lisp Implementations in 2023
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since you're going to be a condescending pendant...everything after the colon is why it doesn't make sense for him , not why it doesn't make sense for anyone , and it's very clear that's the point he's making. It's a common fallacy around here: " I think this, therefore it's applicable to everyone ".
*pedant. ;-)
Ouch. And thus, all my sophistry is discredited. ;-)