Live data from Hacker News

CL21: An experimental project redesigning Common Lisp

cl21.org

101–102 of 102 posts

Re: CL21: An experimental project redesigning Common Lisp

#101
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is complete bullshit? I'm told the Lisp machines were awesome but I've never had the opportunity to use one. I was only starting programming on an Amiga 500 around 89-90 in BASIC. I wouldn't even know what Lisp was until 2007-2008. Or is my terribly lazy and misinformed history of the AI winter and the rise of inexpensive Unix mainframes inaccurate as to the reason why Lisp suddenly dropped out of vogue? I've on…

You wrote: '>tldr; there were once only commercial implementations of Common Lisp that cost far too much and delivered little. Because money. Which is complete bullshit.' that's bullshit. Complete bullshit. Lisp Machines were programmed in ZetaLisp (aka Lisp Machine Lisp) and Interlisp. Not Common Lisp. Common Lisp appeared later on Lisp Machines as an additional Lisp dialect and software was than gradually moved to…

You're right. I don't know where my head was at when I made that comment. I was totally wrong and I apologize the the parent and everyone else who came across it.

Maybe I was struggling to recall Dan Wienreb's post[0] on the failure of Symbolics and somehow confusing that with other things and not making much sense.

Thanks for clarifying.

[0] http://lemonodor.com/archives/2007/11/why_did_symbolics_fail...

Re: CL21: An experimental project redesigning Common Lisp

#102
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

nub is widely recognized to be a terrible function; it's not indicative of anything

It's not? Then I suppose princ is a fine name for a print function.

Unfortunately, name, `nub`, is the best thing about this function. It has horrible (O(n^2)) performance, and only works with lists.
Post reply on HN