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

An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)

simonsafar.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 194 posts

Re: An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)

#11

Post by aidenn0 »

FredPret wrote: post #4
fooker wrote: post #2

It's a bit sad that this ecosystem has fallen out of favor for mainstream software development. One could have designed OOP like frontends to this fairly easily, and I'm sure there are existing ones. How did Java and C++ take over?

I’ve tried multiple times to get into SBCL, but every time I run into the problem that I have to learn Emacs first. I know there are lots of other ways to work with SBCL, but they are either second-class citizens or paid.

You can use emacs just for the REPL/debugger, and another editor for editing files. I did this for a couple of years, after previously using CLISP for its REPL. You can use the menus for things; the only keyboard shortcut you MUST know is CTRL-G (which if you hit enough times will cancel whatever operation you accidentally started).

Alternatively try geany-lisp[1], it was created specifically for those with emacs phobia. There are probably some sharp corners using it, so feel free to file issues if you run into any. It should work with Geany 1.26-1.38; when posting this, I just noticed that there is now a Geany 2.0; I'm assuming the major version bump broke plugins so it may not work anymore.

1: https://github.com/jasom/geany-lisp

Re: An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)

#12

Post by ilrwbwrkhv »

fooker wrote: post #2

It's a bit sad that this ecosystem has fallen out of favor for mainstream software development. One could have designed OOP like frontends to this fairly easily, and I'm sure there are existing ones. How did Java and C++ take over?

Well take over is relative. I built my startup using SBCL and it is very profitable. Couldn't have done it without SBCL.

Re: An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)

#13

Post by fooker »

ilrwbwrkhv wrote: post #12
fooker wrote: post #2

It's a bit sad that this ecosystem has fallen out of favor for mainstream software development. One could have designed OOP like frontends to this fairly easily, and I'm sure there are existing ones. How did Java and C++ take over?

Well take over is relative. I built my startup using SBCL and it is very profitable. Couldn't have done it without SBCL.

>Couldn't have done it without SBCL

Could you elaborate this part?

Re: An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)

#14

Post by rayiner »

FredPret wrote: post #4
fooker wrote: post #2

It's a bit sad that this ecosystem has fallen out of favor for mainstream software development. One could have designed OOP like frontends to this fairly easily, and I'm sure there are existing ones. How did Java and C++ take over?

I’ve tried multiple times to get into SBCL, but every time I run into the problem that I have to learn Emacs first. I know there are lots of other ways to work with SBCL, but they are either second-class citizens or paid.

You don't strictly need to learn Emacs, but you should probably just join the cult. I bit the bullet and did it about 20 years ago now, and it's been a good thing. Heck, I've got a non-programming dayjob now, but I've still got a keyboard that puts the control key under my thumb: https://x-bows.com.

Re: An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)

#15

Post by potta_coffee »

FredPret wrote: post #4
fooker wrote: post #2

It's a bit sad that this ecosystem has fallen out of favor for mainstream software development. One could have designed OOP like frontends to this fairly easily, and I'm sure there are existing ones. How did Java and C++ take over?

I’ve tried multiple times to get into SBCL, but every time I run into the problem that I have to learn Emacs first. I know there are lots of other ways to work with SBCL, but they are either second-class citizens or paid.

I'm in the same boat. I just don't care about EMACS, don't like it, and there's little incentive when I'm just playing around. It's a shame because Lisp is really fun and interesting. I just don't want to spend so much time dicking around with an editor just so I can write some code.

Re: An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)

#16

Post by pfdietz »

taeric wrote: post #9
FredPret wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve tried multiple times to get into SBCL, but every time I run into the problem that I have to learn Emacs first. I know there are lots of other ways to work with SBCL, but they are either second-class citizens or paid.

Why would you have to learn emacs? You can largely batch compile and run lisp code same as any other language, if that is what you want to do. In many ways, the workflow can be very similar to python, if you don't want to get too advanced in the repl. And, to stress, you don't have to get too advanced to get going.

Simply using rlwrap with sbcl is workable.

Re: An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)

#17

Post by greenyoda »

amock wrote: post #10

remember that we're on x86 here, which is a big-endian architecture While I wish this were true, x86 is little-endian.

The author correctly states that x86 has "lower bits at the beginning, bigger bits on the end", but, as you said, that's the definition of little-endian.

Re: An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)

#18

Post by hayley-patton »

pfdietz wrote: post #8
hedora wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Java took over by targeting large teams of inexperienced developers. C++ took over by adding OO to C with zero cost abstractions, and then evolving into modern C++ (which discourages OO and encourages composition via template instantiation) without leaving programs behind. Lisp has supported composition forever (it is one of the big advantages of functional programming), and the macro language is similar to templates…

> is often interpreted Every competitive Common Lisp implementation has compilation. SBCL defaults to not even using an interpreter for eval.

SBCL eval interprets until you hit a lambda form, at which point it will compile (last I checked). But you are much more correct than who you replied to :)

Re: An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)

#19

Post by TeMPOraL »

hayley-patton wrote: post #18
pfdietz wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> is often interpreted Every competitive Common Lisp implementation has compilation. SBCL defaults to not even using an interpreter for eval.

SBCL eval interprets until you hit a lambda form, at which point it will compile (last I checked). But you are much more correct than who you replied to :)

Unless I'm misremembering, this is only true in REPL, which should be better read as "SBCL is actually sometimes *AoT-compiling in interactive REPL sessions!!!"; #'LOAD-ing files would AoT-compile them by default.

Re: An Exploration of SBCL Internals (2020)

#20

Post by linguae »

fooker wrote: post #2

It's a bit sad that this ecosystem has fallen out of favor for mainstream software development. One could have designed OOP like frontends to this fairly easily, and I'm sure there are existing ones. How did Java and C++ take over?

Let’s make a trip back to the early and mid 1990s when C++ was a young language and Java was under development (it was released in 1995). At the time the most popular object-oriented language was Smalltalk, Common Lisp was at its peak of commercial popularity (largely in symbolic AI niches), and there were other niche OO languages that were heavily influenced by Smalltalk and Common Lisp (Objective-C in the NeXT world, Apple’s Dylan under development).

However, if I know my history correctly, Smalltalk and Common Lisp implementations were generally not cheap. Objective-C was largely tied to NeXT, which required buying into a niche ecosystem. Dylan was a casualty of Apple’s mid-1990s business struggles.

C++ benefitted from inexpensive implementations from vendors such as Borland and Microsoft, and it also benefitted from its close relationship with C, which already gained a foothold in the 1980s.

Java benefitted not only from Sun’s marketing machine, but also from its free compiler and runtime from Sun. Java overtook Smalltalk, despite the fact that Java lacks Smalltalk’s dynamics.

I think had there been solid cheap or free Smalltalk and Common Lisp implementations around 1992, Java wouldn’t have gained a foothold, though C++ would have still been very appealing to C developers, though perhaps if Objective-C were more broadly available to non-NeXT developers, it would’ve been a formidable competitor to C++ in terms of providing a “C with objects” environment.

Post reply on HN