Ancestors

Toot

Written by Kar on 2024-12-11 at 16:33

@screwtape I've been enjoying listening to the lispy gopher show archives on anonradio.net when commuting. Got me finally convinced on switching to Emacs (and not quitting within a couple hours to go back to vi/vim) and properly learning lisp to (eventually) join you and the other secret alien celebrities. Just wanted to say thanks for hosting a good show! :flan_smile:

(also thanks to @prahou for boosting your posts, otherwise wouldn't have known about it)

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from kar@camp.crates.im

Descendants

Written by Vladimir on 2024-12-12 at 05:50

@kar @screwtape @prahou is this the same kind of pipeline as rust’s normie-> python hater -> crossdresser -> femboy/trans??

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from vavakado@mas.to

Written by screwlisp on 2024-12-12 at 06:53

@vavakado

python is the cmucl compiler right? Why would you hate it? Because of all the optimize conventions now that just are-what-it-did ?

@kar @prahou

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from screwtape@mastodon.sdf.org

Written by Kar on 2024-12-12 at 14:38

@vavakado @screwtape @prahou I'm not familiar with Rust but I guess you can say I'm in the second or third stage.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from kar@camp.crates.im

Written by Kar on 2024-12-12 at 15:11

@vavakado @screwtape @prahou I guess to elaborate a bit, I'm primarily a C programmer with a focus on hardware, so while OCaml & functional programming seemed interesting to me, I couldn't really get into it. Lisp on the other hand seems to also have a hardware community with its Lisp machines while also easier to use than say Forth, which I'm also interested in. The show got me past the first stage of "this looks interesting, I'll just leave it on the backlog for things I don't return to." 1/2

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from kar@camp.crates.im

Written by Kar on 2024-12-12 at 15:14

@vavakado @screwtape @prahou Rust on the other hand I tried getting into. Rather, I tried learning it first quite a few years ago (after Java and Python), but didn't like it at the time so I tried C++ instead, but also didn't like it, and ended up with C. I tried getting into Rust again about half a year ago since it does have a healthy hardware community, but still couldn't bring myself to use it with its C++-like syntax (which I hate the colon-hell) & general complexity over C. 2/2

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from kar@camp.crates.im

Written by Vladimir on 2024-12-12 at 15:22

@kar @screwtape @prahou i personally started programming in general with python but quickly stopped doing it cuz at the time i was still too young and just wasn't smart enough, so i just continued watchig the cs type of content but didn't code myself. and about a year and a half ago i discovered rust and then godot, made some games(which i still make with my friend) and projects before finding elixir and sticking with it because it just clicks with me idk. but i wanna try lisp at some point

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from vavakado@mas.to

Written by screwlisp on 2024-12-12 at 19:07

@vavakado

At the moment, (game programmer of decades) mdh has started experimenting with CLIM; it's definitely more programmery than godot, depending on what you were doing with godot, and also nothing like rust.

@kar

I think someone points out that lisp machines were more important when computers were slow and you needed a hardware optimized cdadr to be performant. On the other hand, replacing problematic consumer computers/OSes with lisp machine FPGAs...! https://tumbleweed.nu/r/uhdl/doc/trunk/README.md

@prahou

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from screwtape@mastodon.sdf.org

Written by Kar on 2024-12-12 at 19:52

@screwtape @vavakado @prahou Thanks for sharing! I wanted to get an FPGA to do exactly that!

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from kar@camp.crates.im

Written by screwlisp on 2024-12-12 at 21:24

@kar Great, I am looking forward to following what you do.

Do get in contact with @amszmidt (tumbleweed.nu) about getting into the fpga lispmachines.

@vavakado @prahou

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from screwtape@mastodon.sdf.org

Written by Kar on 2024-12-12 at 22:59

@screwtape @amszmidt @vavakado @prahou Will do once I actually get an FPGA. :flan_thumbs:

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from kar@camp.crates.im

Written by Vladimir on 2024-12-12 at 20:35

@screwtape what would be your advice on getting into #lisp for someone like me? should i start with something easier like scheme and then go to lisp? which flavor of lisp should i use(besides elisp for emacs)?

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from vavakado@mas.to

Written by screwlisp on 2024-12-12 at 20:56

@vavakado Lisp generally means common lisp, though I do like basically everyone else (cool) as well. One thing is that you want something like slime's debugger rather than trying to use the protocol it uses by hand. I was reminded of this when mdh was asking about what this weird interface being presented by lisp in a terminal on errors was.

In my emacsconf talk, in the second half I get-lisp-working in basically the trickiest common case (I want emacs slime and clim). https://toobnix.org/w/pfYUAuMPmkTRfBZSgXFtbT

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from screwtape@mastodon.sdf.org

Written by Karsten Johansson on 2024-12-13 at 02:59

@screwtape @vavakado To be fair, calling it common lisp suggests that if someone just says "lisp" without any other qualifier there is a significant chance they mean the common one.

On the flip side, I'm surprised that just because there is elisp, a lot of people automagically assume if you program lisp, you use emacs. I don't. I won't.

(before everyone gets their pitchforks out: I won't, 'cos I've been using Lisp off and on since the early 90's, and have no interest in changing my flow... it has nothing to do with religion. I'm all good with the emacs bretherhood. And I happen to like vi a lot more lol.)

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from ksaj@infosec.exchange

Written by semitone on 2024-12-12 at 21:17

@vavakado @screwtape My unsolicited opinion based on picking up Lisp in my teens: Keep it simple because Common Lisp is anything but. Use a good implementation (I suggest sbcl), a good development environment (SLIME on Emacs) and a good book (I read Paul Graham's ANSI Common Lisp). And after you decided that you actually like it, you can branch out and have a look at libraries available though quicklisp and check out more advanced or up-to-date books.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from semit0ne@mastodon.social

Written by screwlisp on 2024-12-12 at 21:18

@semit0ne

I formally solicit your future opinions

@vavakado

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from screwtape@mastodon.sdf.org

Written by Digital Mark λ ☕️ 🕹 🙄 on 2024-12-12 at 22:07

@vavakado @screwtape I do most of my game dev in Chez Scheme, using Thunderchez libraries like SDL2, in Vim, and it's nice but has taken some effort to get where I wanted. It does make fast binaries, but I struggle with packaging.

Common Lisp is weird and difficult. I don't know that emacs being weird and difficult too helps with that, but they seem to think it's consistent. It does eventually work, and has some neat tools… which are still unfinished.

[#]scheme #lisp

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from mdhughes@appdot.net

Written by Digital Mark λ ☕️ 🕹 🙄 on 2024-12-12 at 22:10

@vavakado @screwtape Peter Siebel's Practical Common Lisp was a good intro, but I still end up spending a LOT of time in the CLHS instead of a brief list of functions and getting down to code.

It's worth learning both, and SICP and TSPL https://www.scheme.com/tspl4/

are excellent books for Scheme.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from mdhughes@appdot.net

Written by screwlisp on 2024-12-13 at 01:47

@mdhughes

Weird and difficult unresolved lunchtime floundering viz a terminal display -> https://codeberg.org/tfw/climterm

@vavakado

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from screwtape@mastodon.sdf.org

Written by vindarel on 2024-12-13 at 10:39

@mdhughes

the CLHS instead of a brief list of functions and getting down to code

I contributed pages to the Cookbook with exactly this need in mind. See https://lispcookbook.github.io/cl-cookbook/data-structures.html or https://lispcookbook.github.io/cl-cookbook/strings.html They show lists of functions. Hope this helps.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from vindarel@framapiaf.org

Written by Karsten Johansson on 2024-12-13 at 03:08

@vavakado @screwtape If you go into common lisp, look at clisp. It does everything one could expect with lisp, but is a lot more forgiving of common mistakes.

I use clisp to hash out new ideas, because ideas can be fleeting and I don't care to think about flushing buffers and whatnot. Clisp knows how lazy I am and does what I hope. The jam sessions that produce code that does what I hope it would do then gets loaded and fixed in sbcl.

Also, I wouldn't call scheme easier. It's smaller. But that doesn't mean easier. You can learn all of it faster because ... it's smaller.

As a 35 year Lisper, I find a lot of scheme baffling. It's not "easier" so much as they mean there is less to learn of the actual commands etc, but more to learn to accomplish what is considered slobberproof in common lisp. Ease is not the actual selling point.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from ksaj@infosec.exchange

Written by Hayley on 2024-12-12 at 21:36

@screwtape @vavakado @kar I don't remember saying such, I wouldn't know if CDADR gets one instruction, but I probably would say 1. CDR coding is nice if you're tight on memory*, which people were at the time and 2. the funky hardware was faster until compiler tech caught up

Smalltalk on a RISC is cooler hardware in my worthless opinion (take that, AMS), the details are only in papers but I think there's enough for someone to implement it; someone doing hardware now should think about what compilers/software can't help with, and put that in hardware

• cache should count for this too, but no one CDR codes now, oh well

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from hayley@social.applied-langua.ge

Written by screwlisp on 2024-12-12 at 21:40

@hayley

I'll try and break my habit of attributing ideas to you and just say them myself in the future sorry!

@kar @vavakado

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from screwtape@mastodon.sdf.org

Written by Christian Lynbech on 2024-12-12 at 20:52

@kar @vavakado @screwtape @prahou For people into hardware, depending on the type of hardware of course, it might be worth checking out uLisp, a Lisp for microcontrollers. It might also be a simpler starting point than Common Lisp which is a fairly big language (even if one does not have to know all of it to get started).

http://www.ulisp.com

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from mapcar@mastodon.sdf.org