Are we close to a Lisp boom ?
in [Lisp]
|
Prev: ANN: SymbolicWeb v0.1 (quite alpha) w/ source code this time
Next: Greenspunning ML (revisited)
From: Ken Tilton on 5 May 2008 21:25 David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus) wrote: > On Sun, 04 May 2008 19:09:58 +0200, John Thingstad <jpthing(a)online.no> wrote: >>Common Lisp is just a common denominator for Lisp's. Commercial versions >>like LispWorks and ACL come with large libraries in addition to ANSI >>Common Lisp. > > > Thats the problem. I'm no longer writing CL, I'm writing a dialect of > CL that is dependent on the success or otherwise of my vender. Lock-in is a gray-scale, If you cannot switch from ODB to RDB in a heavily-caffeinated long weekend we need you extinct. hth, kenny -- http://smuglispweeny.blogspot.com/ http://www.theoryyalgebra.com/ ECLM rant: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1331906677993764413&hl=en ECLM talk: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9173722505157942928&q=&hl=en
From: Pascal J. Bourguignon on 6 May 2008 03:17 "David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)" <dformosa(a)usyd.edu.au> writes: > On Sun, 04 May 2008 19:09:58 +0200, John Thingstad <jpthing(a)online.no> wrote: >> P� Sun, 04 May 2008 05:08:43 +0200, skrev <scholz.lothar(a)gmail.com>: > [...] >>> Without Unicode support, Windows Ports, true Multithreading i think >>> definietly not. >> >> Of course my LispWorks system supports all of the above.. >> It does not do 'symmetric' multiprocessing if that is what you mean. >> I might add that none of these things are a part of the C standard either. >> That hasn't prevented C from being a popular language. > > However the libraries to do those things have been standardized. This is false. There are some standards, but you have to considerably restrict your targets to be able to use them. Even on a single platform like Linux, you've got to choose between three different API to do multi-threading, for example. And let's not talk about GUI API! And while you have some level of POSIX support in linux, unix, macosx (mach kernel), MS-Windows, BeOS, Haiku, QNX, etc, it is the most basic common denominator API you can get. >> Common Lisp is just a common denominator for Lisp's. Commercial versions >> like LispWorks and ACL come with large libraries in addition to ANSI >> Common Lisp. > > Thats the problem. I'm no longer writing CL, I'm writing a dialect of > CL that is dependent on the success or otherwise of my vender. Or you can choose to use libraries that offer some platform independence, but life won't be easy sometimes. -- __Pascal Bourguignon__
From: Duane Rettig on 6 May 2008 04:08 EL <eckhardnospam(a)gmx.de> writes: > Spiros Bousbouras schrieb: >> If it's true that as we progress in time, successive >> fashionable languages resemble Lisp more and >> more then Lisp's turn should come at some point. >> Do you agree with this argument ? If yes, would >> you say we're close to a Lisp boom ? > > At least you guys made it on rank 16 in this <ironic>very > meaningful</ironic> index here: > http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html > > And in the "cleaned up" list here on rank 11: > http://cdsmith.wordpress.com/2007/06/18/is-tiobe-fatally-flawed/ > > Not bad, eh ;-)? Notice he had to re-split the Lisp and Scheme categories, in order to make his list believable - would anyone have accepted a list like that where Lisp/Scheme ranked in positions close to Fortran and C? :-) -- Duane Rettig duane(a)franz.com Franz Inc. http://www.franz.com/ 555 12th St., Suite 1450 http://www.555citycenter.com/ Oakland, Ca. 94607 Phone: (510) 452-2000; Fax: (510) 452-0182
From: Pascal J. Bourguignon on 6 May 2008 04:41 Duane Rettig <duane(a)franz.com> writes: > EL <eckhardnospam(a)gmx.de> writes: > >> Spiros Bousbouras schrieb: >>> If it's true that as we progress in time, successive >>> fashionable languages resemble Lisp more and >>> more then Lisp's turn should come at some point. >>> Do you agree with this argument ? If yes, would >>> you say we're close to a Lisp boom ? >> >> At least you guys made it on rank 16 in this <ironic>very >> meaningful</ironic> index here: >> http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html >> >> And in the "cleaned up" list here on rank 11: >> http://cdsmith.wordpress.com/2007/06/18/is-tiobe-fatally-flawed/ >> >> Not bad, eh ;-)? > > Notice he had to re-split the Lisp and Scheme categories, in order to > make his list believable - would anyone have accepted a list like that > where Lisp/Scheme ranked in positions close to Fortran and C? > > :-) And I notice a CL in 27th position too. If we added Lisp+Scheme+CL, the sky's the limit! Actually the first position, but good enough :-) -- __Pascal Bourguignon__
From: EL on 6 May 2008 07:28
Pascal J. Bourguignon schrieb: >> Notice he had to re-split the Lisp and Scheme categories, in order to >> make his list believable - would anyone have accepted a list like that >> where Lisp/Scheme ranked in positions close to Fortran and C? >> >> :-) > > And I notice a CL in 27th position too. If we added Lisp+Scheme+CL, > the sky's the limit! Actually the first position, but good enough :-) > Zynically: I thought that Lisp programmers don't need to google that much for their tools, in order to get something done. Contrahery to the Java/Python crowd... So it must really be the interest of newbies that we see here ;-). -- Eckhard |