Re: Common Lisp
On 12/26/2011 09:16 PM, Teemu Likonen wrote: #!/usr/bin/sbcl --script (write-line Hello, world!) ... For installing external libraries the best choise is Quicklisp: http://www.quicklisp.org/beta/ ... Practical Common Lisp by Peter Seibel is very good tutorial/book. It's available in the Internet as well as printed book. http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/ Thanks! :-) David -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4efa7427.3010...@holgerdanske.com
Common Lisp (was: OT programming languages/ systems for advanced applications on Linux)
* 2011-12-26T14:14:13-08:00 * David Christensen wrote: Which Debian Squeeze package do you recommend for hello, world! and STFW tutorials? #!/usr/bin/sbcl --script (write-line Hello, world!) * 2011-12-26T15:43:54-08:00 * David Christensen wrote: On 12/26/2011 01:12 AM, Teemu Likonen wrote: That's Common Lisp. I think SBCL is the most popular free-software implementation for the language. Emacs+Slime is the most popular development environment. I've installed all three packages and will play with them. For installing external libraries the best choise is Quicklisp: http://www.quicklisp.org/beta/ Practical Common Lisp by Peter Seibel is very good tutorial/book. It's available in the Internet as well as printed book. http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87y5tyr3vv.fsf...@mithlond.arda
[O-T] Common Lisp - A Gentle Introduction to Symbolic Computation
Pessoal- Quem tem curiosidade sobre Lisp, pode pegar este excelente livro on-line: http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/LispBook/index.html Eu mesmo não sei nada de Lisp (então, não me perguntem em PVT!), mas vou aprender. Tb: http://www.lisp.org A título de curiosidade (despertar o apetite), leia sobre linguagens de programção funcionais. Elas têm um paradigma diferente das que a gente está mais acostumado a usar. Envovlem uma __outra maneira de pensar__: O FAQ de comp.lang.functional pode ser lido em: http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~gmh//faq.html#functional-languages [ ]s henry
Re: Scheme/lisp and music was: Common Lisp
On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 08:45:00AM -0700, Stephen A. Witt wrote: On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Thomas Guettler wrote: Hi all! I want to learn lisp or scheme, too. I have read the faqs at www.faqs.org, and I am still not convinced which language I should start to learn. Scheme is much smaller, Common Lisp has more libraries What I want to do: I want to make some electronic music. I am dreaming of accessing the ALSA-sequencer via lisp. A song could be a list of parts, and a part a list of notes... Can some help me choosing a language (lisp/scheme). Book-recommendations are welcome! A few years ago I was working on an experimental expert system project using an expert system shell that was written in LISP. All of the actions that happened when a rule fired were LISP functions. It was great and I loved programming in that language. I would probably recommend Scheme as I think it is an improvement to LISP in some ways, most dealing with the structure of the language. The problem with Scheme is that there haven't been practical interpreter/compilers for it, unlike LISP which has more mature tools for doing practical programming. By practical I mean having useful libraries for doing real work, such as Python or Perl have. Hi Stephen. As long that there is a binding to normal libraries written in C, I think I will have all I am searching for. Scheme seems to be a little more academic and frankly, functional computer lanuguages (like Scheme or LISP) are not in vogue right now. I think object oriented languages are the thing right now, so Java and C++ seem to be very popular. I programmed a little LISP some years ago. I had the idea to start to learn it when I worked with XML. In XML you have one element which can elements, in Lisp you have a list of lists. But I must admit it has probably been a couple of years since I searched around for a good Scheme interpreter/compiler. I was hoping that Guile would become that and maybe it has. I suppose I'll have to check back with that project and see where its at. I heard good things from Guile. In terms of a book recommendation, one of the classics (IMHO) of computer science uses Scheme as its example language. It is Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs. Great book. I will look at it. You realize, I hope, that you will have to use Emacs if you intend to program in LISP or Scheme. It is simply the only editor that will do :). Dad, why do we hide from the police? They use emacs, son, we use vi (No, was a joke, I use emacs where ever I can. (emacs -nw)) -- Thomas Guettler Office: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.interface-business.de Private:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://yi.org/guettli
Scheme/lisp and music was: Common Lisp
Hi all! I want to learn lisp or scheme, too. I have read the faqs at www.faqs.org, and I am still not convinced which language I should start to learn. Scheme is much smaller, Common Lisp has more libraries What I want to do: I want to make some electronic music. I am dreaming of accessing the ALSA-sequencer via lisp. A song could be a list of parts, and a part a list of notes... Can some help me choosing a language (lisp/scheme). Book-recommendations are welcome! -- Thomas Guettler Office: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.interface-business.de Private:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://yi.org/guettli
Re: Scheme/lisp and music was: Common Lisp
On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Thomas Guettler wrote: Hi all! I want to learn lisp or scheme, too. I have read the faqs at www.faqs.org, and I am still not convinced which language I should start to learn. Scheme is much smaller, Common Lisp has more libraries What I want to do: I want to make some electronic music. I am dreaming of accessing the ALSA-sequencer via lisp. A song could be a list of parts, and a part a list of notes... Can some help me choosing a language (lisp/scheme). Book-recommendations are welcome! A few years ago I was working on an experimental expert system project using an expert system shell that was written in LISP. All of the actions that happened when a rule fired were LISP functions. It was great and I loved programming in that language. I would probably recommend Scheme as I think it is an improvement to LISP in some ways, most dealing with the structure of the language. The problem with Scheme is that there haven't been practical interpreter/compilers for it, unlike LISP which has more mature tools for doing practical programming. By practical I mean having useful libraries for doing real work, such as Python or Perl have. Scheme seems to be a little more academic and frankly, functional computer lanuguages (like Scheme or LISP) are not in vogue right now. I think object oriented languages are the thing right now, so Java and C++ seem to be very popular. But I must admit it has probably been a couple of years since I searched around for a good Scheme interpreter/compiler. I was hoping that Guile would become that and maybe it has. I suppose I'll have to check back with that project and see where its at. In terms of a book recommendation, one of the classics (IMHO) of computer science uses Scheme as its example language. It is Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs. Great book. You realize, I hope, that you will have to use Emacs if you intend to program in LISP or Scheme. It is simply the only editor that will do :).
Common Lisp
Hi all, I am interested in learning lisp... but what compiler do I pick? There seems to be a plethora of free compilers available: Allegro CL CLiCC CLISP CMUCL ECoLisp GCL Poplog jlisp AKCL LILY RefLisp WCL + a whole bunch of derived libraries and stuff. Are any of these better than the other? Which one should I use if I am interested in learning ANSI Common Lisp? Thanks :P = --- Academia is a little like child | Parrish M. Myers rearing, it provides a chance at | The Wacked Jester immortality without the stretch | [EMAIL PROTECTED] marks -- (unknown source)| --- __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE. http://im.yahoo.com/
Re: Common Lisp
I guess you could start with clisp, cause thats Common Lisp interpreter and compiler. Andrei -- First there was Explorer... Then came Expedition. This summer Coming to a street near you.. Ford Exterminator. -- Andrei Ivanov http://arshes.dyndns.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12402354 --
Re: Common Lisp
Quoth Parrish M Myers, I am interested in learning lisp... but what compiler do I pick? There seems to be a plethora of free compilers available: While not an answer to your question, if you are planning on teaching yourself lisp, have a look at this site: http://apsymac33.uni-trier.de:8080/elm-art/login-e It's an intereactive traning course for lisp. It seems to be very comprehensive (I've only made it through lesson 1 so far), and is easy to follow. It's probably worth checking out. cheers, damon -- Damon Muller | Did a large procession wave their torches Criminologist/Linux Geek | As my head fell in the basket, http://killfilter.com | And was everybody dancing on the casket... PGP (GnuPG): A136E829 | - TBMG, Dead pgpHv56WscgSi.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Common Lisp] I'm working on the clisp package...
On 31 Aug 1997, John Goerzen wrote: How does this differ from gcl (GNU Common Lisp)? I haven't used GCL much. Clisp is GPL'd, so it's just as distributable as GCL. I'm using clisp because it appeared o be a little further along in the development stage. Clisp is also (now) available as a debian package :) Will --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.cis.udel.edu/~lowe/ For PGP Public Key, visit my website. --- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: [Common Lisp] I'm working on the clisp package...
How does this differ from gcl (GNU Common Lisp)? Thanks, John Goerzen Will Lowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The new version of clisp was released today from it's upstream source. I'm going to package it for debian, probably this weekend. If you use clisp (or are likely to use it), please let me know if you think the following modules are appropriate: CLX (common lisp X-interface) STDWIN (standard windowing toolkit) READLINE (i'm using this instead of newreadline because it's been better tested) Any opinions would be appreciated. The windowing toolkits, in particular, seem to increase the size of the binary significantly, but I'm assuming that if you're doing a lot of lisp development you're probably not overly concerned with disk efficiency anyway... Will [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.cis.udel.edu/~lowe/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . -- John Goerzen | Running Debian GNU/Linux (www.debian.org) Custom Programming| Debian GNU/Linux is a free replacement for [EMAIL PROTECTED] | DOS/Windows -- check it out at www.debian.org. --+-- Notice: You may purchase the right to send me unsolicited commercial e-mail (spam) for the fee of $500 (USD) per message. Billing can be either pre-arranged or can occur automatically after the reception of a spam. Failure to pay will be treated in accordance to US Code, title 47, sec. 227, which allows unsolicited e-mail to be punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss or $500, whichever is greater, per violation. Sending spam to me without payment constitutes unauthorized access to my mail daemon, which is in violation of federal law. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
[Common Lisp] I'm working on the clisp package...
The new version of clisp was released today from it's upstream source. I'm going to package it for debian, probably this weekend. If you use clisp (or are likely to use it), please let me know if you think the following modules are appropriate: CLX (common lisp X-interface) STDWIN (standard windowing toolkit) READLINE (i'm using this instead of newreadline because it's been better tested) Any opinions would be appreciated. The windowing toolkits, in particular, seem to increase the size of the binary significantly, but I'm assuming that if you're doing a lot of lisp development you're probably not overly concerned with disk efficiency anyway... Will [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.cis.udel.edu/~lowe/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
