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

It's 2023, so of course I'm learning Common Lisp

log.schemescape.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 346 posts

Re: It's 2023, so of course I'm learning Common Lisp

#11

Post by schemescape »

Zambyte wrote: post #9

I don't see why the author says: > I had previously abandoned using Scheme because, frankly, I ran out of free time for exploratory programming. But they find Common Lisp acceptable. In what way are Schemes more "exploratory" than Common Lisp? Isn't that exactly what the author says they like about CL (REPL driven development)?

Sorry that was unclear. What I meant was: a while back, I was exploring Scheme (motivated by SICP) and then ran out of free time. Now, I’ve got some free time again and want to try Common Lisp because of the REPL-driven workflow.

It wasn’t meant to be a comment on Scheme vs. CL.

Re: It's 2023, so of course I'm learning Common Lisp

#12

Post by peanutz454 »

nine_k wrote: post #4

The scoop: Scheme and Janet are great, but the author wants a more standalone language. What makes the difference is the breakloop, a full-blown REPL that opens when an error in a program occurs. Not a stacktrace, not a debugger; just build from the point where it's currently broken.

This sounds so amazing, why is Common Lisp not the most popular language out there? (asking as someone who almost never writes code)

Re: It's 2023, so of course I'm learning Common Lisp

#13

Post by nbf_1995 »

haolez wrote: post #5
ilrwbwrkhv wrote: post #3

Steel Bank Common Lisp is the workhorse which led me to build profitable software companies. I don't think I would be as productive without it. The repl driven workflow is amazing and the lisp images are rock solid and highly performant.

It looks awesome, but I'm too lazy as of today to go back to Emacs. I usually just use VSCode close to the defaults for my (mostly) Python and JavaScript development. I don't code full time, since I'm on a CTO role.

You may be interested in https://github.com/nobody-famous/alive which brings the power of slime to vscode (Mostly, it's relatively new and missing some features, but getting better all the time)

Re: It's 2023, so of course I'm learning Common Lisp

#14

Post by Blackthorn »

peanutz454 wrote: post #12
nine_k wrote: post #4

The scoop: Scheme and Janet are great, but the author wants a more standalone language. What makes the difference is the breakloop, a full-blown REPL that opens when an error in a program occurs. Not a stacktrace, not a debugger; just build from the point where it's currently broken.

This sounds so amazing, why is Common Lisp not the most popular language out there? (asking as someone who almost never writes code)

It's questionable whether it's really much better than just a debugger with a core dump (what I usually work on, it's not any better). It is, however, a pretty snazzy feature.

Re: It's 2023, so of course I'm learning Common Lisp

#15

Post by behnamoh »

robomartin wrote: post #10

Let me preface this by saying I used LISP professionally in the '80's for about ten years. It's a great language. It is right up there at the top of my list with Assembler, APL and Forth as languages that taught me so much more than the typical C-like language path most people are exposed to today. And, yes, I used those languages professionally for years. I have always said it is important to learn these non-C langu…

> In other words, I believe that, today, the only reason to pick a language is likely something like: It's what I know and it has the libraries, frameworks and support I need.

I would take it even further and say that in the near future, everyone will have their own beloved DSL completely customized to their needs and the AI will be able to translate any code to your favorite DSL. You’ll code and commit the changes and the AI will take care of that and convert it back to other peoples’ DSL’s.

Re: It's 2023, so of course I'm learning Common Lisp

#17

Post by paulddraper »

peanutz454 wrote: post #12
nine_k wrote: post #4

The scoop: Scheme and Janet are great, but the author wants a more standalone language. What makes the difference is the breakloop, a full-blown REPL that opens when an error in a program occurs. Not a stacktrace, not a debugger; just build from the point where it's currently broken.

This sounds so amazing, why is Common Lisp not the most popular language out there? (asking as someone who almost never writes code)

Performance, approachability

Someone's going to argue with me. Fair enough. Provide your explanation.

Re: It's 2023, so of course I'm learning Common Lisp

#18

Post by belmarca »

nine_k wrote: post #4

The scoop: Scheme and Janet are great, but the author wants a more standalone language. What makes the difference is the breakloop, a full-blown REPL that opens when an error in a program occurs. Not a stacktrace, not a debugger; just build from the point where it's currently broken.

This is standard in Gambit Scheme as well.

Re: It's 2023, so of course I'm learning Common Lisp

#19

Post by dleslie »

peanutz454 wrote: post #12
nine_k wrote: post #4

The scoop: Scheme and Janet are great, but the author wants a more standalone language. What makes the difference is the breakloop, a full-blown REPL that opens when an error in a program occurs. Not a stacktrace, not a debugger; just build from the point where it's currently broken.

This sounds so amazing, why is Common Lisp not the most popular language out there? (asking as someone who almost never writes code)

Eventually you need to work with other people, and using a common time-shared or multi user session is unlikely. Now consider that lisp images generally can't be easily diff'd or merged.

And with that the edit-and-continue paradigm loses much of its value. If you have to commit changes to a shared source file anyhow then you'll be not much worse off with debugging a core dump.

Re: It's 2023, so of course I'm learning Common Lisp

#20

Post by nescioquid »

robomartin wrote: post #10

Let me preface this by saying I used LISP professionally in the '80's for about ten years. It's a great language. It is right up there at the top of my list with Assembler, APL and Forth as languages that taught me so much more than the typical C-like language path most people are exposed to today. And, yes, I used those languages professionally for years. I have always said it is important to learn these non-C langu…

I was going to reply by suggesting emacs lisp as a candidate language, really making it a bet on how long emacs will be around. Will people (commonly) be using emacs in 50 years? I think people will, though I hesitate to say so. If it turns out that we converge on text as a necessary interface to a computer (at least in some cases), maybe the bet pays off.

But I think your idea that the expression of a program will become fungible or machine-translatable is much more salient. Though if the program itself depends on a whole chain of ancient dependencies and idioms (think a VB UI in front of an Access DB) might run afoul of infinite regress. So, to really future-proof on a long time-horizon, it seems you need to be preoccupied with a lot more than the programming language.

Post reply on HN