DotLisp – A Lisp dialect for .Net
dotlisp.sourceforge.net
DotLisp – A Lisp dialect for .Net
1–10 of 26 posts
Re: DotLisp – A Lisp dialect for .Net
#2What about F# and Nemerle? Why you need another lisp?
Oh this article dates 2003, that is why.
Re: DotLisp – A Lisp dialect for .Net
#3Few people know that Clojure was not the first lisp worked on by Rich Hickey (I think Clojure was the 5th?). This was the last one he wrote before he started work on Clojure.
Re: DotLisp – A Lisp dialect for .Net
#4What about F# and Nemerle? Why you need another lisp? Oh this article dates 2003, that is why.
You're right, this article could do with a tag.
Re: DotLisp – A Lisp dialect for .Net
#5What about F# and Nemerle? Why you need another lisp? Oh this article dates 2003, that is why.
Nemerle and F# may be functional, but neither is a lisp. One big difference is that this is a dynamic language, whereas F# and Nemerle are static.
Re: DotLisp – A Lisp dialect for .Net
#6Few people know that Clojure was not the first lisp worked on by Rich Hickey (I think Clojure was the 5th?). This was the last one he wrote before he started work on Clojure.
What were the other 3?
Re: DotLisp – A Lisp dialect for .Net
#7> It is substantially more sophisticated than DotLisp and I strongly recommend it, unless you must target .Net.
> The idea behind DotLisp was to build a Lisp for .Net that yielded to the CLR those things provided by the CLR that languages normally have to provide themselves:
Is the author aware that Rich also implemented ClojureCLR? http://clojure.org/clojureclr
I'm curious how DotLisp improves on the situation provided by clojureclr, especially since "It is substantially more sophisticated than DotLisp".
It might be "sharing type system, GC and other runtime services etc., with transparent access to .Net w/o a FFI or wrappers", I am note sure if clojureclr requires wrappers whereas DotLisp doesn't, but I imagine it would be similar to how Clojure proper integrates with the JVM.
Re: DotLisp – A Lisp dialect for .Net
#8> It is substantially more sophisticated than DotLisp and I strongly recommend it, unless you must target .Net. > The idea behind DotLisp was to build a Lisp for .Net that yielded to the CLR those things provided by the CLR that languages normally have to provide themselves: Is the author aware that Rich also implemented ClojureCLR? http://clojure.org/clojureclr I'm curious how DotLisp improves on the situation provi…
The author is Rich Hickey. This was a project of his before Clojure, and he just never updated the page after Clojure became available for the CLR.
Re: DotLisp – A Lisp dialect for .Net
#9> I'm not a Lisp expert. Helpful suggestions are always welcome.
> ©2003 Rich Hickey, All Rights Reserved
I was amused.
Re: DotLisp – A Lisp dialect for .Net
#10> It is substantially more sophisticated than DotLisp and I strongly recommend it, unless you must target .Net. > The idea behind DotLisp was to build a Lisp for .Net that yielded to the CLR those things provided by the CLR that languages normally have to provide themselves: Is the author aware that Rich also implemented ClojureCLR? http://clojure.org/clojureclr I'm curious how DotLisp improves on the situation provi…
The author is Rich Hickey. This was a project of his before Clojure, and he just never updated the page after Clojure became available for the CLR.
ah, whoops - that was quite a mistake on my part!