On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 05:07:46PM +0200, andr...@itship.ch wrote:
> Disclaimer: I don't really know Common Lisp.
> Just a try, use it as inspiration not as answer, would need re-wording to be
> used as quora answer:
> - they're about the same age, both inspired by Maclisp, both used
> commercially since the 1980s
> - picolisp is a language and runtime VM - CL is a language specification with
> multiple implementations
> - CL libraries may often be platform-dependent (or depend on a certain
> compiler to be used) - code in picolisp has much less such dependencies
> - picolisp has no compiler, purely interpreted by design - CL is usually
> compiled, interpreted only during development
> - picolisp directly evals s-expressions, the structure of the memory
> representation is the same as the structure of the source code - common lisp
> compiles to XX (?)
> - only 3 strong types: list, number (arterially big signed integers), symbol
> (with property list), all other types are dynamically duck-typed - common
> lisp has many types (?)
> - picolisp uses F-Expressions (FEXPRs, Functions which decide themselves
> if/when/how to evaluate arguments) - common lisps uses macros (rewrite code).
> F-Expr are slightly more powerful but cannot be compiled
> - common lisp as big community - picolisp community is pico
> - many libraries for CL - in picolisp programmers usually re-use libraries
> from other languages
> - picolisp strongly follows unix philosophy - CL does not follow unix
> philosophy ( http://chrisdone.com/posts/haskell-lisp-philosophy-difference )
> - picolisp has integrated graph database, persistent database objects are
> first-class citizens, integrated prolog engine
> - picolisp has no multithreading, instead picolisp has integrated IPC to work
> with multiple processes and makes asynchronious programming easy - common
> lisp has ... ???
> Please correct my errors.
Wow! Perfect! I see no error(s) ...
Instead of answering in quora, I suggest we simply put a link there, pointing to