simulating local lexical variables with symbol macros
in [Lisp]
|
Prev: Mistake in the specification of rotatef ?
Next: [ann] LTK based libraries Runtime Library 3.0 and Gestalt Items 1.1
From: mdj on 20 Nov 2009 01:34 On Nov 20, 3:53 pm, Ron Garret <rNOSPA...(a)flownet.com> wrote: > > You could use C. > > > Seriously. Just base it on the internals of my new txr program. > > Greenspun's tenth in all its horrible glory. Just as I was reading that, Emacs went into a spinloop I couldn't C-g out of ....
From: Kaz Kylheku on 20 Nov 2009 04:08 On 2009-11-20, Ron Garret <rNOSPAMon(a)flownet.com> wrote: > In article <20091119165505.75(a)gmail.com>, > Kaz Kylheku <kkylheku(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 2009-11-19, Tim Bradshaw <tfb(a)cley.com> wrote: >> > Now, seriously. I have a program in mind which: >> > * will need to parse XML config files (realistically: I'd use sexps if >> > I have the choice but the target market will not accept that. >> > * needs to run on a wide variety of Unix/Linux platforms (recompilation >> > is fine) including very old versions of the OS >> > * needs to be pretty intimate with POSIX >> > * probably will ship source but do not want GPL contagion >> >> You could use C. >> >> Seriously. Just base it on the internals of my new txr program. > > Greenspun's tenth in all its horrible glory. Ti ti di daaaaaa! No wait, that's Beethoven's Fifth.
From: Ron Garret on 20 Nov 2009 10:59 In article <20091120010731.432(a)gmail.com>, Kaz Kylheku <kkylheku(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 2009-11-20, Ron Garret <rNOSPAMon(a)flownet.com> wrote: > > In article <20091119165505.75(a)gmail.com>, > > Kaz Kylheku <kkylheku(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On 2009-11-19, Tim Bradshaw <tfb(a)cley.com> wrote: > >> > Now, seriously. I have a program in mind which: > >> > * will need to parse XML config files (realistically: I'd use sexps if > >> > I have the choice but the target market will not accept that. > >> > * needs to run on a wide variety of Unix/Linux platforms (recompilation > >> > is fine) including very old versions of the OS > >> > * needs to be pretty intimate with POSIX > >> > * probably will ship source but do not want GPL contagion > >> > >> You could use C. > >> > >> Seriously. Just base it on the internals of my new txr program. > > > > Greenspun's tenth in all its horrible glory. > > Ti ti di daaaaaa! > > No wait, that's Beethoven's Fifth. I thought Beethoven's Fifth went "Da da da dumb..." rg
From: Tim Bradshaw on 21 Nov 2009 09:12 On 2009-11-20 00:46:49 +0000, Ron Garret <rNOSPAMon(a)flownet.com> said: > Noooooooooo!!! Perl is a freakin' nightmare. (That's one thing Erik > and I definitely agreed on.) Yes, it is, but I'm pretty good at writing clean Perl ("clean" meaning "I can maintain it years later"), and things like tainting are pretty useful for what I have in mind. Also I have to be pragmatic: Perl can actually do what I need, can actually run on everything and so on. > > Try CCL (Clozure Common Lisp). I believe you will find it meets all > your needs. CCL is a fine CL (it's what I use day to day), but I need at least x86, SPARC, Itanium, PA-RISC and POWER as targets (and LInux/Solaris/HP-UX/AIX as platforms), which I suspect rules it out (and probably rules out almost any native-code thing). Someone else suggested C: I am not up to writing complicated security-sensitive code in C in which I have enough confidence (runs as root on production systems where compromises are (a) very expensive and (b) have my name somewhere in the "responsible people" chain). There probably are people who can do this, but it is pretty hard I think. Python I could use I guess, and I was fairly fluent in it a while ago, though I kind of dislike it for the same reasons I dislike Scheme: too much religion in there. For someone else who said I've not given enough information: no, I haven't, but its a bit hard for me to do so as my ideas are not really completely sorted, and the initial cut will be tied to a large customer's internal processes which I'm not at liberty to talk about. Sorry! They got beam round LHC last night, it looks like. --tim
From: dan on 21 Nov 2009 09:47
Tim Bradshaw <tfb(a)cley.com> writes: > Yes, it is, but I'm pretty good at writing clean Perl ("clean" meaning > "I can maintain it years later"), and things like tainting are pretty > useful for what I have in mind. Also I have to be pragmatic: Perl can > actually do what I need, can actually run on everything and so on. I would be looking at Perl (which I know) or Ruby (which I don't much, but I reasonably expect would be up to the job). Unless you expect to be using unicode significantly, because the unicode in ruby 1.8 is Not There Yet. -dan |