So many words to say: Scheme. :)
R5RS, R6RS, or R7RS?
A Road to Lisp: Which Lisp
21–30 of 180 posts
Re: A Road to Lisp: Which Lisp
#22I wonder if Hylang is still alive.
There's also Rhombus now: https://docs.racket-lang.org/rhombus-quick/index.html
Re: A Road to Lisp: Which Lisp
#23I really wanted to Lisp as a main programming language, and sometimes I still do. I just find readability such a hurdle regardless of how long I used it. I didn't find that it ever became as natural as the other group of programming languages. I find a procedural style of programming so much easier to reason about, both when writing and reading. Either way, I'm really happy I took some time to learn it and use it a l…
> I find a procedural style of programming so much easier to reason about, both when writing and reading.
Then do that.
There's nothing stopping you from using pretty much any style of programming that you like. Or mix and match. Or evolve over time.
Loops, lists, arrays, structures. Simple iteration: dotimes, dolist, loop. If those are your bread and butter, then feast! CL will happily do that. That's what I do. I just don't think "functionally" when I do CL code, I'm just not there yet, so its unnatural for me, and not what comes spewing out of my fingers when I write code.
And it's "OK".
You don't have to use the other features of the language, but they're there if you want to dip your toe into it.
With CL, also, I tend to be really wordy on variable and function names. I'm really fond of kabob-case-for-identifers.
Re: A Road to Lisp: Which Lisp
#24Shut up and learn Common Lisp using Practical Common Lisp.
This would be my advice. Why? My own road was haphazard. Other books broaden your mind and teach you really cool tricks. This book gets you using lisp like you would say golang. But it still teaches you the lisp things and broadens your mind. Time spent choosing will be better spent reading this book. After that PAIP, On Lisp, SICP etc.
Re: A Road to Lisp: Which Lisp
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
(Heresy alert. Inb4 homoinconcity) I do find that most of my lisp skills carry over to JavaScript quite well while allowing me to write imperative functions more fluently. Prog blocks are pretty good. I wonder if another DSL could be better.
Maybe because Brendan Eich was tasked with "doing Scheme in the browser" before it pivoted to JavaScript.
Imagine what could have been...
Re: A Road to Lisp: Which Lisp
#26I have a work-in-progress called Modus. 100% written by Claude, so take that however you will. The current release boots on a Raspberry Pi Zero 2 W. The next release (unreleased in the pipe for ~ months) is standard Common Lisp on bare aarch64 (pi) and x64 (qemu for now), with linux aarch64 and x64 command line interfaces à la sbcl. https://github.com/modus-lisp/modus Since you can't use an OS by itself, I've rounded…
That's pretty neat!
God help me if I fell down a hole like that.
I must say, however, that e.g. code like (compile-compound) is something only an AI can love!
Re: A Road to Lisp: Which Lisp
#27[deleted]
Re: A Road to Lisp: Which Lisp
#28I really wanted to Lisp as a main programming language, and sometimes I still do. I just find readability such a hurdle regardless of how long I used it. I didn't find that it ever became as natural as the other group of programming languages. I find a procedural style of programming so much easier to reason about, both when writing and reading. Either way, I'm really happy I took some time to learn it and use it a l…
Common Lisp code can be very procedural if that's what you want to do. The entire loop macro is basically importing Algol-styled procedural loops into Lisp.
Re: A Road to Lisp: Which Lisp
#29For me the complete spec is the killer feature. You can learn Common Lisp in 1990 and write it the same now. As long as we can keep the compilers alive it will be forever. It’s funny to me that it was critiqued for being “bloated” when now it looks like a focused minimal library.
Common Lisp wasn't standardised until 1994.
Also, SBCL has some nice features specific to them, I'm sure it's the same for other implementations. So while there's a lot that's common between them all I find myself using a lot of platform specific functions.
Re: A Road to Lisp: Which Lisp
#30Since a few folks here recommended Common Lisp to me as the language that would "tick all my boxes", I've been doing a deep dive. Right now, I'm working through SICP again with DrRacket. The first time I worked through it with MIT Scheme MANY years ago. It's shocking how much I've forgotten. What I like about this article is that it walks through the different "camps" of Lisp. Scheme is so intriguing to me because of…
I can also recommend clojure. For me it has the best parts of common lisp and the best of the java ecosystem. But its also quite different from common lisp and scheme. Different enough to find some unique ideas.
Writing scripts using [0] Babashka is also really nice.