Lisp and ncurses
in [Lisp]
|
From: Cecil Westerhof on 19 Dec 2009 09:31 Tamas K Papp <tkpapp(a)gmail.com> writes: >> I find it more important that it works in a text based environment >> (working with ssh), so ncurses has priority. But I will look into ltk >> also. > > I can understand that. After you experiment with a few different > ncurses-based frameworks, please consider summarizing your findings > here or in a blog post. I'll do that. I'll think I will do it in a blog then. Easier to keep it up to date when I learn something new and more accessibly. >>> I would qualify that: SBCL is better _for certain purposes_. But CLISP >>> is quite nice too. >> >> Is there anywhere a comparison about the different versions? > > Google is your friend. c.l.l had a couple of threads on this topic, > and there are some surveys/blog posts on the net, but be advised that > most Lisp implementations move quite fast, and some information may be > outdated. It is best to keep most of your code free from implementation- > dependent trick (quite easy to do in CL), so you can adapt it later. I think I will default switch to SBCL (after installing), but test my code in different version. In this way I can switch easier and be sure my code can be used by as many people as possible. What are the most used versions? Then I can download and install them. -- Cecil Westerhof Senior Software Engineer LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof
From: Tamas K Papp on 19 Dec 2009 14:12 On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 15:31:29 +0100, Cecil Westerhof wrote: > Tamas K Papp <tkpapp(a)gmail.com> writes: > >>> I find it more important that it works in a text based environment >>> (working with ssh), so ncurses has priority. But I will look into ltk >>> also. >> >> I can understand that. After you experiment with a few different >> ncurses-based frameworks, please consider summarizing your findings >> here or in a blog post. > > I'll do that. I'll think I will do it in a blog then. Easier to keep it > up to date when I learn something new and more accessibly. > > >>>> I would qualify that: SBCL is better _for certain purposes_. But >>>> CLISP is quite nice too. >>> >>> Is there anywhere a comparison about the different versions? >> >> Google is your friend. c.l.l had a couple of threads on this topic, >> and there are some surveys/blog posts on the net, but be advised that >> most Lisp implementations move quite fast, and some information may be >> outdated. It is best to keep most of your code free from >> implementation- dependent trick (quite easy to do in CL), so you can >> adapt it later. > > I think I will default switch to SBCL (after installing), but test my > code in different version. In this way I can switch easier and be sure > my code can be used by as many people as possible. What are the most > used versions? Then I can download and install them. I think by versions, you mean implementations, don't you? It depends entirely on the context. SBCL is popular on Linux and among number-crunchers. CLISP is used a lot on Windows, AFAIK, but also on Linux. ECL is a nice implementation that allows you to produce small & fast executables for easy deployment. The list could go on, all implementations have a user base, so they are useful for some things. And of course there are non-free implementations, but I am not the best person to talk about those as I have never used any of them (but maybe I will, in the future). Cheers, Tamas
From: Cecil Westerhof on 19 Dec 2009 14:50 Tamas K Papp <tkpapp(a)gmail.com> writes: >> I think I will default switch to SBCL (after installing), but test my >> code in different version. In this way I can switch easier and be sure >> my code can be used by as many people as possible. What are the most >> used versions? Then I can download and install them. > > I think by versions, you mean implementations, don't you? Yes, I do. > It depends entirely on the context. SBCL is popular on Linux and among > number-crunchers. CLISP is used a lot on Windows, AFAIK, but also on > Linux. ECL is a nice implementation that allows you to produce small & > fast executables for easy deployment. The list could go on, all > implementations have a user base, so they are useful for some things. > And of course there are non-free implementations, but I am not the best > person to talk about those as I have never used any of them (but maybe I > will, in the future). I work with Linux, on this clisp is default installed and is what I am using now. I was already thinking about switching to SBCL. I will also look into ECL. -- Cecil Westerhof Senior Software Engineer LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof
From: Pascal J. Bourguignon on 19 Dec 2009 16:51 Cecil Westerhof <Cecil(a)decebal.nl> writes: > pjb(a)informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon) writes: > >> Clisp has a simplier screen interface than ncurses. If you don't need >> the complexitities of ncurses, you may be happy enough with it. >> >> http://clisp.cons.org/impnotes/screen.html > > For the time being this is enough for what I want. This works for all > Common Lisp variants, or only for clisp? http://clisp.cons.org/impnotes/screen.html ^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ I would say only for clisp, and moreover: Platform Dependent: UNIX, Win32 platforms only. -- __Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/ WARNING: This product warps space and time in its vicinity.
From: Cecil Westerhof on 19 Dec 2009 17:07 pjb(a)informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon) writes: >> pjb(a)informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon) writes: >> >>> Clisp has a simplier screen interface than ncurses. If you don't need >>> the complexitities of ncurses, you may be happy enough with it. >>> >>> http://clisp.cons.org/impnotes/screen.html >> >> For the time being this is enough for what I want. This works for all >> Common Lisp variants, or only for clisp? > > http://clisp.cons.org/impnotes/screen.html > ^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ > > I would say only for clisp, and moreover: I now understand the difference between clisp and CL. ;-] > Platform Dependent: UNIX, Win32 platforms only. For me that is -at the moment- enough. But that properly means that when I want to write scripts that interact it will not be implementation independent. Well I then just have to but the screen code in a different file. -- Cecil Westerhof Senior Software Engineer LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof
First
|
Prev
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 Prev: Funding/Supporting future Common Lisp infrastructure development Next: Flushing output |