Prev: The correct choice for implementation
Next: to RG - Lisp lunacy and Perl psychosis
From: Tamas K Papp on 9 Mar 2010 06:51
On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 12:57:56 +0200, Teemu Likonen wrote:

> * 2010-03-09 11:25 (+0100), Petter Gustad wrote:
>
>> Do you have any particular reason why you want to use CLISP and not
>> SBCL if you're on Linux? If not I would suggest using SBCL.
>
> I don't know. When I started I heard nobody saying that CLISP is the
> wrong choice. I think CLISP works nicely. It can run scripts that begin
> with #!/usr/bin/clisp (out-of-the-box) and there is this nice readline
> support automatically, even with (read-line *query-io*).

Note that SBCL can also run scripts
(http://www.sbcl.org/manual/Shebang-Scripts.html), but what you really
need is http://www.cliki.net/cl-launch.

If you readline support, chances are that you are making your life
more difficult than it should be (hint: use SLIME), but rlwrap will
give it to you in SBCL.

> Maybe I'll switch to SBCL but I'm pretty sure that some other areas suck
> in SBCL. Maybe some other libraries won't work.

I don't understand how you can be sure if you have never tried it.

Anyway, trying out different implementations is not that big of a deal
in CL, so I don't really see why you didn't just try instead of
complaining before you do.

Tamas
From: Tamas K Papp on 9 Mar 2010 08:54
On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 12:18:29 +0000, Erik Winkels wrote:

> On 2010-03-09, Tamas K Papp <tkpapp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> If you readline support, chances are that you are making your life more
>> difficult than it should be
>
> Not really.

I wonder why you say that. Do you program by typing code into the
command line? I don't really see how that would be comfortable, let
alone productive.

This issue comes up occasionally, eg see

http://coding.derkeiler.com/Archive/Lisp/comp.lang.lisp/2007-08/threads.html#00174

Tamas
From: Tamas K Papp on 9 Mar 2010 09:19
On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:09:09 +0000, Erik Winkels wrote:

> On 2010-03-09, Tamas K Papp <tkpapp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 12:18:29 +0000, Erik Winkels wrote:
>>> On 2010-03-09, Tamas K Papp <tkpapp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If you readline support, chances are that you are making your life
>>>> more difficult than it should be
>>>
>>> Not really.
>>
>> I wonder why you say that. Do you program by typing code into the
>> command line? I don't really see how that would be comfortable, let
>> alone productive.
>
> I don't do that but although I generally use Emacs + SLIME developing
> without them using a CL implementation with readline support is pretty
> painless. Better than sending a beginner off to Emacs + SLIME if he
> doesn't have experience with them, especially since he's apparently
> already familiar with readline based environments.
>
> After all redefining functions is only a :w and a history-1 away :)

I disagree. I think that investing even just an hour into learning
some basic SLIME functionality has significant payoffs.

But convenience aside, I don't even understand how people manage to do
_any_ serious work just using the command line, with or without readline
support (cf http://xkcd.com/378/ :-)

Tamas
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: The correct choice for implementation
Next: to RG - Lisp lunacy and Perl psychosis