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

Pixie – A small, fast, native Lisp

pixielang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–164 of 164 posts

Re: Pixie – A small, fast, native Lisp

#161

Post by gw »

junke wrote: post #160
hkjgkjy wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I meant was that [] when glancing just means the same as '(). I was thinking about it over the day, and realized maybe having special syntax actually is confusing - maybe "normal" lisp with only parens is better. Thanks for the eye-opener.

Thanks for your comment. The idea behind the Lisp reader approach is that custom syntax is used for reading/printing objects of different types, not to demarcate syntactic elements. For example, double quotes are for strings, #P"" will read pathnames, and so on. In Common Lisp, some characters like [ and { are reserved for the user, meaning that no conforming implementation defines a custom syntax based on those char…

Hash maps wouldn't work for bindings because they don't guarantee order, whereas the order of the bindings is very important.

Re: Pixie – A small, fast, native Lisp

#162

Post by junke »

gw wrote: post #161
junke wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for your comment. The idea behind the Lisp reader approach is that custom syntax is used for reading/printing objects of different types, not to demarcate syntactic elements. For example, double quotes are for strings, #P"" will read pathnames, and so on. In Common Lisp, some characters like [ and { are reserved for the user, meaning that no conforming implementation defines a custom syntax based on those char…

Hash maps wouldn't work for bindings because they don't guarantee order, whereas the order of the bindings is very important.

You are right, I forgot about that (the example was not great anyway). Thanks

Re: Pixie – A small, fast, native Lisp

#163

Post by lispm »

throwaway91111 wrote: post #148
lispm wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SBCL does treeshaking? I thought it just dumps the image.

Well that would explain it. Any idea why they don't tree shake?

Because no one wrote one. There were some attempts but nothing which would work now. Delivering small applications does not seem to be a focus of SBCL users.

https://www.snellman.net/blog/archive/2005-07-06.html

There is also the possibility to compress the image. See :compression option when saving an image:

http://www.sbcl.org/manual/#index-g_t_0040sbext_007bsave_002...

Commercial Lisp implementations like LispWorks and Allegro CL have a treeshaker for delivery, but that's not too surprising, since these products are for developers of applications and the users pay for such features.

Re: Pixie – A small, fast, native Lisp

#164

Post by Flow »

Quequau wrote: post #7
Flow wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you tried any Clojure->Scheme compilers? After that stage you can use any Scheme->C/Whatever compiler.

There are Clojure->Scheme compilers?

Yes, at least one, and I don't know how well it works. But here it is:

https://github.com/takeoutweight/clojure-scheme

Post reply on HN