I know that the purpose of the page is to compare syntax of common lisp, racket, clojure, and emacs lisp.
But some examples could be more idiomatic, for instance instead of
(defun add (a &rest b)
(if (null b)
a
(+ a (eval (cons '+ b)))))
One should avoid eval and use endp instead of null:
(defun add (a &rest b)
(if (endp b) a
(apply #'add (+ a (first b)) (rest b))))
ludston 7 minutes ago [-]
Worse: Using recursion in Common Lisp isn't idiomatic, given that CL doesn't guarantee tail-call optimisation in the specification.
CodeArtisan 41 minutes ago [-]
Shouldn't it be
(+ a (apply + b))
vindarel 1 hours ago [-]
Notes on CL:
- why nothing on the "compiler" line? Everytime you load a snippet or a file with SBCL, it compiles it (to machine code). There's also compile-file.
- interpreter: likewise, all code is compiled by default with SBCL, not interpreted, even in the REPL. To use the interpreter, we must do this: https://github.com/lisp-tips/lisp-tips/issues/52
- command line program: the racket cell shows the use of -e (eval), the same can be done with any CL implementation.
- since the string split line introduces cl-ppcre, one could mention cl-str :D (plug) (much terser join, trim, concat etc)
- ah ok, for dates and times, flattening a list, hash-table literals… we need more libraries.
- java interop: with LispWorks or ABCL (or other libraries)
my 2c
sinsudo 55 minutes ago [-]
Since you are also commenting libraries, I think that FSet (1) for inmutable memory,and perhaps a comparison with clojure, and the quick-lisp package manager could be mentioned.
Are `(push s x)` and `(push x s)` correct for push and insert, resp.?
sinsudo 2 hours ago [-]
The page indicates that there is not function for documentation in common lisp, but
(documentation 'documentation 'function)
"Return the documentation string of Doc-Type for X, or NIL if none
exists.
System doc-types are VARIABLE, FUNCTION, STRUCTURE, TYPE, SETF, and T.
Also http://rosettacode.org for computer tasks implemented in many computer languages to allow you compare syntax and code.
ethagnawl 2 hours ago [-]
This is really neat.
Something I've been meaning to do is try putting together a cross-lisp package manager -- if only because it'd be fun. Maybe it would favor code that could be readily run or eval'd or maybe with some sort of clj/cljs type dynamic dispatch for anything implementation specific.
Would be interesting to see how Jank is coming along in this space as well.
eamonnsullivan 3 hours ago [-]
Clojure 1.6, Emacs 24.5... These are pretty old versions, at least of those.
db48x 3 hours ago [-]
Most of the things in that table won’t change from version to version anyway.
FergusArgyll 1 hours ago [-]
As someone who's not a programmer but has beginner - medium python & C skills. I'm in middle of learning lisp (elisp to be precise) and it feels like reading poetry. It's a transcendent experience that's hard to explain. Such beautiful concepts. Everything flows in a way it doesn't in C based langs
FrustratedMonky 1 hours ago [-]
Nice comparison.
But makes me think we'd be better off if we all just focused on a single one, and grew it, made it better. Not having 4 versions of something almost identical. Fragmentation can hurt adoption.
ludston 3 minutes ago [-]
They are as different from one another as Java is from C# is from JavaScript.
erichocean 21 minutes ago [-]
There are deep reasons for the variations, especially around (reader) macros.
- why nothing on the "compiler" line? Everytime you load a snippet or a file with SBCL, it compiles it (to machine code). There's also compile-file.
- interpreter: likewise, all code is compiled by default with SBCL, not interpreted, even in the REPL. To use the interpreter, we must do this: https://github.com/lisp-tips/lisp-tips/issues/52
- command line program: the racket cell shows the use of -e (eval), the same can be done with any CL implementation.
- since the string split line introduces cl-ppcre, one could mention cl-str :D (plug) (much terser join, trim, concat etc)
- ah ok, for dates and times, flattening a list, hash-table literals… we need more libraries.
- more files operations: https://lispcookbook.github.io/cl-cookbook/files.html
- emacs buffers: now compare with Lem buffers 8-)
- posix-getenv: I'd rather use uiop:getenv (comes in implementations).
- uiop:*command-line-arguments*
- exit: uiop:quit
- uiop:run-program (sync) / launch-program (async)
- java interop: with LispWorks or ABCL (or other libraries)
my 2c
(1) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47779659
https://kickingvegas.github.io/elisp-for-python/
Something I've been meaning to do is try putting together a cross-lisp package manager -- if only because it'd be fun. Maybe it would favor code that could be readily run or eval'd or maybe with some sort of clj/cljs type dynamic dispatch for anything implementation specific.
But makes me think we'd be better off if we all just focused on a single one, and grew it, made it better. Not having 4 versions of something almost identical. Fragmentation can hurt adoption.
https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_mono/cl.html