Funding/Supporting future Common Lisp infrastructure development
in [Lisp]
|
Prev: run-program and binary input
Next: Lisp and ncurses
From: verec on 20 Dec 2009 08:41 On 2009-12-20 12:09:55 +0000, Jochen Schmidt <jsc(a)crispylogics.com> said: > But I don't see why Clojure and Common Lisp has to be mutual exclusive. How many good JavaS do you have? How many PythonS, HaskellS, RubyS ? When the King is dead, let's just welcome the new King. > Sometimes I get the feeling that all those trolls moaning around on > c.l.l (and creating nothing) are now over at clojure. At least some of those "trolls" (myself for example) have contributed $$$ to Clojure in a way that no other CL has ever enthused them (me) to do. > Seriously: Was that really a problem for you in the past? You can > implement your own datastructures so easily in CL. Yeah, yeah, yeah ... I can even go down to assembly and rewrite everything. Maybe I should consider binary too, end just key in everything one On/Off switch at a time ... >> What is relevant is the new directions that Clojure sets for >> us, while, finally, pushing to the forefront the essence of >> Lisp (as above). > > Who is "us"? All those guys pissed off by the closed mind set of CLers, who understand Lisp (as opposed to CL or Scheme), and had been wishing, for years, that some dictator would emerge and take the lead. For a time I (we) thought that would be Paul Graham and Arc. But after much disapointment, completely out of the blue, Rich Hickey popped up from the void with his brilliant synthesis of old and new ideas, moving us towards parrallelism in a way no other language has yet. >> People don't pay (donate) for what they already have. >> People pay for what they want but don't have yet. >> They pay for "dreams", for projections of themselves in >> the future, not for deeds commited in the past and long >> (and best) forgotten. > > Well, people pay for Clozure CL funding and its thriving really well. > I personally support Lispworks because they actually do a really cool > job delivering a rich Lisp IDE and a solid compiler and runtime. They > also recognized concurrent programming as an important topic and they > offer solutions and the tools to build your own, if one is still not > happy. In the most practical sense: Clojure is no viable alternative > to Lispworks for me - absolutely not. That's all a question of momentum. And momentum has left CL years if not decades ago. But is now pushing Clojure forward. I have used LW and CloZure. The only plus they have, for *me* is a not even half decent IDE (as opposed to *nothing* for everything else, including CloJure) For me, the for ever emacs/command-line hater, to switch to Clojure which doesn't even have anything even remotely ressembling an IDE, is a testament to the few "killer" features that had me overcome the CLI/REPL barriers: - litteral support for sets, maps, - multi arity functions - pervasive destructuring - and loads of clever details (map/vectors as a function of their key/index), `let' as it should always have been (ie: let*), killing of redundant parens in let and cond, etc ... After years of sttutering in Lisp, I finally find myself able to speak! *that* is liberation that no other Lisp ever came close to allow me to. And I guess that is the reason that a lot of people like me who had had lust for Lips for years, but couldn't even think of any practical application in their everyday work, are suddenly re-awakening to Lisp, and finally reaping the benefits that only had been pipe dreams in their eyes all along. That is Huge. -- JFB
From: joswig on 20 Dec 2009 09:08 On 20 Dez., 14:41, verec <ve...(a)mac.com> wrote: > On 2009-12-20 12:09:55 +0000, Jochen Schmidt <j...(a)crispylogics.com> said: > > > But I don't see why Clojure and Common Lisp has to be mutual exclusive. > > How many good JavaS do you have? How many PythonS, HaskellS, RubyS ? I can't keep track of all the Java VM, Python and Ruby. Google has its own Java VM derivative. IBM has one. Oracle has one. SAP has one. Pypy, Cython,..., Ruby, JRuby, Rubinius, IronRuby, Maglev, ... > At least some of those "trolls" (myself for example) have contributed > $$$ to Clojure in a way that no other CL has ever enthused them (me) > to do. Non-trolls have contributed to Common Lisp more than any number of trolls will ever contribute to anything. .... > All those guys pissed off by the closed mind set of CLers, who > understand Lisp (as opposed to CL or Scheme), and had been wishing, > for years, that some dictator would emerge and take the lead. I was always hoping that they get a constant stream of new toys to keep them busy. Clojure will survive you guys. > > For a time I (we) thought that would be Paul Graham and Arc. But > after much disapointment, completely out of the blue, Rich Hickey > popped up from the void with his brilliant synthesis of old and > new ideas, moving us towards parrallelism in a way no other language > has yet. Rich Hickey did not came completely out of the blue. Rich has been working with Lisp for a long time. LispWorks users for example now him for some libraries he wrote. JFLI (2004) for example and FOIL (2005). Rich has lots of experience and he has already tried a few approaches. .... > After years of sttutering in Lisp, I finally find myself able to speak! > *that* is liberation that no other Lisp ever came close to allow me to.. I think that's great for you. Enjoy it. > And I guess that is the reason that a lot of people like me who had had > lust for Lips for years, but couldn't even think of any practical > application in their everyday work, are suddenly re-awakening to Lisp, > and finally reaping the benefits that only had been pipe dreams in their > eyes all along. > > That is Huge. We'll see what you write with Clojure. That's what counts.
From: Thomas F. Burdick on 20 Dec 2009 11:12 On Dec 18, 12:46 pm, d...(a)telent.net wrote: > Rainer Joswig <jos...(a)lisp.de> writes: > > In article > > <03571880-502b-479c-a118-86f632554...(a)e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, > > Elena <egarr...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> No, it wouldn't work. Rich Hickey has built a community around > >> Clojure. No such community exists around any CL implementation. > > > Communities in the CL world exist and work. > > > SBCL for example has not one main implementor. > > Still it has a community. > > > Just Monday and Tuesday was the SBCL10 workshop in London: > >http://sbcl10.sbcl.org/ > > Yes, I was there. Elena's assertion seems quite bizarre to me > > [ snip other stuff I agree with ] And it was a very good time, with lots of optimistic, forward-looking discussions and a good amount of hacking.
From: Francisco Vides Fernández on 20 Dec 2009 11:45 verec wrote: > On 2009-12-17 17:32:56 +0000, avi <antvid(a)googlemail.com> said: > > [...] >> Many of you will have noticed the call for funding Rich Hickey made >> over at the Clojure group a few days ago. > [...] >> As a Lisp newbie, I would like such central incentive infrastructure >> also to exist for the free software community of Common Lisp. > > This is just not going to happen. > > Rich Hickey has a story. And a vision. He doesn't > disagree with himself as the single Clojure outside > voice. And Thou will believe in His Word, because He is blessed by the Holy Spirit of Programming, and this is all Good and Well. > CLers keep moaning, without vision but only envy and > disdain, lust for a glorious past forever dead. Well, I've been lurking here for some time, and didn't hear any moan. Instead, constantly hear people helping others, and writing clever stuff from which one can try to learn. But I'll keep an eye open, and tell you if I hear some moanin' to make you happy. > Clojure challenges the status quo (state vs identity > vs value) CL *is* the status quo. Well, I thought Java *is* the status quo. In this small corner of the programming world there isn't people enough to make a status quo. > Clojure offers hope, and motivates towards new frontiers We are talking about programming, are we? You take a good editor, clicketty- click, and try to not break thinks too much. Space exploring is another completely different subject. > (working, scalable parallelism) shunning OO and mutable > state, You forgot to mention time traveling, cold fusion, life after death and New Bread'n'butter. Just to mention some. > while CL keeps grinding the same old axes (aspects? closer to mop? cells?) How many new programming paradigms did you incorpore into Clojure this morning, before breakfast? > People remember Lisp, the 7 primitives, code is data is code, > the ying-yang "eval/apply of page 13", not the IBM 704 (or whatever > that was, who cares?) that gave us the ugly car/cdr legacy. CAR? CDR? I'll take a look into the Hyperspec ... I'm pretty sure I've heard those words before. > The IBM 704 is as relevant to McCarthy's Lisp as the JVM is > relevant to Clojure today: not. Or not much. Mmmm.. I'm confused here. You people tried to sell me that all wonderful java libraries were one of the Clojure Big Pluses. AFAIK, JVM must be under all that thick library cover. Without JVM and Libraries, Clojure is useful like a naked Scheme. Try to do some Real World programming with it. Good luck. > What is relevant is the new directions that Clojure sets for > us, while, finally, pushing to the forefront the essence of > Lisp (as above). We're _still_ talking about a programming language? Aren't we? > Rich Hickey didn't invent persistent data structure anymore > than McCarthy did invent Church lamdda calculus. > > McCarthy was the catalyst that made code as data and "pure" > function, legitimising recursion. > > Hickey is the catalyst who bridges pure functional (well > understood) and mutable state (much less well understood) > in a compelling way. > > Clojure brings *questions* to the table. CL only has *answers*[1] Well, you need some *answers* to Make Working Stuff. Those *questions* you mention are good for mental self-satisfaction. And you should do that in private. > People don't pay (donate) for what they already have. > People pay for what they want but don't have yet. > They pay for "dreams", for projections of themselves in > the future, not for deeds commited in the past and long > (and best) forgotten. Hmm.. google dreams projections future... http://www.astralvoyage.com/projection/timetravel_english.html http://www.the-auras-expert.com/astral-projection.html http://www.alien-ufos.com/dream-future-2012-t23951.html Are we _still_ talking about programming languages????? > CL is (still!) dead! Long live Clojure! Why do you bother talking about a dead language. Go do some real stuff in Clojure and and tell us about the great things you've _done_ > (though it is probably better to be as dead as CL than > as stillborn as Arc ... did he say willing to increase the > number of his ennemies :-) Just to be clear: I'm not a Clojure enemy. I don't know enough of to even dislike it (fill all my time with Common Lisp, trying to stop being a newbie) But I'm pissed with all you illuminates showing all of us poor ignorants the Next Big Thing. I've seen enough Next Big Things. If you don't have something interesting to say/show, just shut the f*ck up. BTW, welcome to my killfile. -- +----------------- | Francisco Vides Fernández <fvides(a)dedaloingenieros.com> | Director técnico. | Dédalo Ingenieros http://www.dedaloingenieros.com/ | PGP: http://pgp.rediris.es:11371/pks/lookup?op=index&search=0xB1299C15 +------
From: Lars Rune Nøstdal on 20 Dec 2009 16:19
On Dec 17, 6:32 pm, avi <ant...(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > Hello Lispers, > > Many of you will have noticed the call for funding Rich Hickey made > over at the Clojure group a few days ago. > > http://clojure.org/funding > > In barely two days more than a hundred of Clojure users and half of > dozen companies together donated more than half of what Rich proposed > to make his dedicated work focused and sustainable in 2010. > > http://clojure.org/funders > > In a similar way a few years ago Bram Moolenar made possible for > people to support Vim development by donating and voting for features. > > http://www.vim.org/sponsor/vote_results.php > http://www.vim.org/sponsor/hall_of_honour.php > > Surely other examples will exist of such free software bounty systems > set up in order to support dedicated developers. > > As a Lisp newbie, I would like such central incentive infrastructure > also to exist for the free software community of Common Lisp. Such a > system would both be a nice way to recompense the developers for their > work on free Lisp software and to find out what features users deem > necessary and would like to see worked on. > > What do you think whether such a bounty infrastructure would work for > the Common Lisp community? Also, does somebody have the experience to > set this up (since I certainly don't)? Yes. I'd like to see something like this for SBCL in particular. Though, what do I know? Perhaps the devs. have their hands full with work based on funding from e.g. ITA already? |