Search Results

Search found 488 results on 20 pages for 'lisp'.

Page 3/20 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • What is a dotted pair's analogy in other Lisp implementations?

    - by octopusgrabbus
    What is Scheme's dotted pair construct analogous to in other Lisp implementations? I can make a vector or list quite easily, and understand those in Clojure, even though the syntax is a little different, like Clojure's vectors use square brackets []. However, seeing a dotted pair for the first time threw me. It almost looks like it is an implementation of of map. I'm not looking for a discussion, but more for use or the dotted pair equivalent in other Lisp dialects, like Clojure, or even Python. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Is there a language offering LISP-like macros with a more complex syntax?

    - by blubb
    LISP's macros are extremely powerful constructs, and the inability to introspect and modify the program itself beyond the method signature level has always struck me as a limitation. Yet I favour "complex" syntax because it tends to be closer to natural language. So far I have failed to find a language which combines a powerful macro mechanism such as LISP's with a naturally looking syntax (1). Is anyone aware of such a language? Footnote: I would consider python to have a naturally looking syntax as it allows constructs like this: if 0 < a < 5 and b in list. The avoidance of braces to structure blocks is irrelevant in this case, though.

    Read the article

  • SOLVED: Lisp: macro calling a function works in interpreter, fails in compiler (SBCL + CMUCL)

    - by ttsiodras
    As suggested in a macro-related question I recently posted to SO, I coded a macro called "fast" via a call to a function (here is the standalone code in pastebin): (defun main () (progn (format t "~A~%" (+ 1 2 (* 3 4) (+ 5 (- 8 6)))) (format t "~A~%" (fast (+ 1 2 (* 3 4) (+ 5 (- 8 6))))))) This works in the REPL, under both SBCL and CMUCL: $ sbcl This is SBCL 1.0.52, an implementation of ANSI Common Lisp. ... * (load "bug.cl") 22 22 $ Unfortunately, however, the code no longer compiles: $ sbcl This is SBCL 1.0.52, an implementation of ANSI Common Lisp. ... * (compile-file "bug.cl") ... ; during macroexpansion of (FAST (+ 1 2 ...)). Use *BREAK-ON-SIGNALS* to ; intercept: ; ; The function COMMON-LISP-USER::CLONE is undefined. So it seems that by having my macro "fast" call functions ("clone","operation-p") at compile-time, I trigger issues in Lisp compilers (verified in both CMUCL and SBCL). Any ideas on what I am doing wrong and/or how to fix this?

    Read the article

  • Programming languages with extensible syntax

    - by Giorgio
    I have only a limited knowledge of Lisp (trying to learn a bit in my free time) but as far as I understand Lisp macros allow to introduce new language constructs and syntax by describing them in Lisp itself. This means that a new construct can be added as a library, without changing the Lisp compiler / interpreter. This approach is very different from that of other programming languages. E.g., if I wanted to extend Pascal with a new kind of loop or some particular idiom I would have to extend the syntax and semantics of the language and then implement that new feature in the compiler. Are there other programming languages outside the Lisp family (i.e. apart from Common Lisp, Scheme, Clojure (?), Racket (?), etc) that offer a similar possibility to extend the language within the language itself?

    Read the article

  • Is there any evidence that lisp actually is better than other languages at artificial intelligence?

    - by Joe D
    I asked this question on SO but it was closed fairly promptly (within 3 minutes) because it was too subjective. I then thought to ask it here on Programmers, a site for "subjective questions on software development". Quoting from the original question: There seems to be a long-held belief (mainly by non-lispers) that lisp is only good for developing AI. Where did this belief originate? And is there any basis in fact to it?

    Read the article

  • Greenspun's Tenth Rule, does every large project include a Lisp interpreter?

    - by casualcoder
    Greenspun's tenth rule (actually the only rule) states that: Any sufficiently complicated C or Fortran program contains an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of Common Lisp. My memory is that there are some papers on the topic, perhaps for Borland's Quattro (spreadsheet) project and possibly others. Google is unhelpful, maybe the right search terms are not coming to mind. I am looking for papers or articles supporting this claim, if any.

    Read the article

  • Learning Lisp - Why ?

    - by David
    I really feel that I should learn Lisp and there are plenty of good resources out there to help me do it. I'm not put off by the complicated syntax, but where in "traditional commercial programming" would I find places it would make sense to use it instead of a procedural language. Is there a commercial killer-app out there that's been written in Lisp ?

    Read the article

  • Lisp-style quotation in HTML

    - by InClj
    In Lisp, evaluating '(+ 1 2) produces '(+ 1 2), not 3. It seems that HTML doesn't support Lisp-style quotation so you can't say something like <quote><b>not bold</b</quote in HTML and let it just produce <b>not bold</b instead of not bold. Is there any technical reason or historical reason for that? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Lisp: Determine if a list contains a predicate

    - by justkt
    As part of a homework assignment in Lisp, I am to use apply or funcall on any predicates I find. My question (uncovered in the coursework) is: how do I know when I've found a predicate in my list of arguments? I've done some basic google searching and come up with nothing so far. We're allowed to use Lisp references for the assignment - even a pointer to a good online resource (and perhaps a specific page within one) would be great!

    Read the article

  • Why is Lisp used for AI?

    - by Cristián Romo
    I've been learning Lisp to expand my horizons because I have heard that it is used in AI programming. After doing some exploring, I have yet to find AI examples or anything in the language that would make it more inclined towards it. Was Lisp used in the past because it was available, or is there something that I'm just missing?

    Read the article

  • What are the reasons why Clojure is hyped and PicoLisp widely ignored?

    - by Thorsten
    I recently discovered the Lisp family of programming languages, and it's definitely one of the more diverse and widespread families in the programming language world. I like Elisp because that most wonderful tool Emacs is an Elisp interpreter. But I was looking for one more Lisp dialect to learn and thought Clojure would be the obvious choice nowadays - until I discovered the well hidden gem PicoLisp. That must be the most intelligent programming environment I have ever seen, like taking the best ideas from Lisp and Smalltalk and adding performance and practicability - and the beauty of parsimony. There is even an Emacs-mode for it. PicoLisp must be the productivity world champion when it comes to building business applications with database and web-client - and that's a very common task. It seems that throwing more and more hardware cores at your PicoLisp application makes it faster and faster, and the database is very performant anyway. However, reactions to PicoLisp in in general mailing-lists etc. are almost hostile (envy?), and there is absolutely no hype and very little publicity (ie not one book published). Are there real justified reasons for this (except the vast amount of java-libs accessible by Clojure, I know that one)? Or is the mainstream it getting wrong again (see C vs Lisp, Java vs Smalltalk, Windows vs Linux) and will come to the conclusion 10 years later that the JVM was good as in between solution, but a really fast Lisp interpreter on multicore machines is much better and allows much cleaner concepts? PS 1: Please note: I'm not interested in Scheme or any Common Lisp dialect, although they might be fine languages. It's just PicoLisp vs Clojure. PS 2: another thing I like about PicoLisp is its similarity to Elisp in certain aspects (both are descendants from MacLisp?) - it's easier to learn two similar languages. There is so much "dynamic binding bashing" on the web, but two of the most appealing Lisp applications use it.

    Read the article

  • Emacs 23.1 make error 139 in Mac OS X 10.6.3

    - by penyuan
    When I try to compile GNU Emacs 23.1 on my machine with Mac OS X 10.6.3 I repeatedly get the following ending: Directories: /src/emacs-23.1/lisp/. /src/emacs-23.1/lisp/./calc /src/emacs-23.1/lisp/./calendar /src/emacs-23.1/lisp/./emacs-lisp /src/emacs-23.1/lisp/./emulation /src/emacs-23.1/lisp/./erc /src/emacs-23.1/lisp/./eshell /src/emacs-23.1/lisp/./gnus /src/emacs-23.1/lisp/./international /src/emacs-23.1/lisp/./language /src/emacs-23.1/lisp/./mail /src/emacs-23.1/lisp/./mh-e /src/emacs-23.1/lisp/./net /src/emacs-23.1/lisp/./nxml /src/emacs-23.1/lisp/./org /src/emacs-23.1/lisp/./play /src/emacs-23.1/lisp/./progmodes /src/emacs-23.1/lisp/./textmodes /src/emacs-23.1/lisp/./url /bin/sh: line 1: 69491 Segmentation fault EMACSLOADPATH=/src/emacs-23.1/lisp LC_ALL=C ../src/bootstrap-emacs -batch --no-site-file --multibyte -l autoload --eval '(setq generated-autoload-file "/src/emacs-23.1/lisp/loaddefs.el")' -f batch-update-autoloads $wins make[2]: *** [autoloads] Error 139 make[1]: *** [/src/emacs-23.1/src/../lisp/loaddefs.el] Error 2 make: *** [src] Error 2 Does anyone know what this means and what I could do to resolve the issue? By the way, here is my ./configure settings: ./configure --prefix=/usr/local --x-includes=/usr/X11/include --x-libraries=/usr/X11/lib --with-x I've tried to compile both with and without X with no success.

    Read the article

  • Please explain some of Paul Graham's points on LISP

    - by kunjaan
    I need some help understanding some of the points from Paul Graham's article http://www.paulgraham.com/diff.html A new concept of variables. In Lisp, all variables are effectively pointers. Values are what have types, not variables, and assigning or binding variables means copying pointers, not what they point to. A symbol type. Symbols differ from strings in that you can test equality by comparing a pointer. A notation for code using trees of symbols. The whole language always available. There is no real distinction between read-time, compile-time, and runtime. You can compile or run code while reading, read or run code while compiling, and read or compile code at runtime. What do these points mean How are they different in languages like C or Java? Do any other languages other than LISP family languages have any of these constructs now?

    Read the article

  • adding an element to a list in lisp

    - by user272483
    i'm using r5rs and i just want to implement a function that returns the intersection of two given lists but i can't do that because i can npot add element to a list. here is my code. how can i fix it? i'm really a beginner in lisp, this is my first work on lisp? thx in advance.. (define list3 '()) (define (E7 list1 list2) (cond ((null? list1) list3) ((member (car list1) list2) (append list3 (list (car list1)))) ) (cond ((null? list1) list3) ((not(null? list1)) (E7 (cdr list1) list2) ) ) ) (E7 '(4 5) '(3 4))

    Read the article

  • Definition of "lisp form"?

    - by josh
    Hi, What exactly the definition of a "Lisp form"? As far as I know, it's "either an atom or a list that has a symbol as its first element". But then, this (in Scheme) would not be a form: ((lambda () 42)) ;; The answer to Life, the Universe and Everything. Because the first element of the list is itself another list. And after it's evaluated it will be a procedure (not a symbol). I can find several different websites and tutorials talking about Lisp forms, but none which gives a complete and detailed definition. Where can I find one?

    Read the article

  • Catching Up with Lisp

    Support for multicore and Big Data are among the upcoming features of Franz's Lisp-based tools Lisp - Programming - Languages - FAQs Help and Tutorials - Compilers and Interpreters

    Read the article

  • Common Lisp condition system for transfer of control

    - by Ken
    I'll admit right up front that the following is a pretty terrible description of what I want to do. Apologies in advance. Please ask questions to help me explain. :-) I've written ETLs in other languages that consist of individual operations that look something like: // in class CountOperation IEnumerable<Row> Execute(IEnumerable<Row> rows) { var count = 0; foreach (var row in rows) { row["record number"] = count++; yield return row; } } Then you string a number of these operations together, and call The Dispatcher, which is responsible for calling Operations and pushing data between them. I'm trying to do something similar in Common Lisp, and I want to use the same basic structure, i.e., each operation is defined like a normal function that inputs a list and outputs a list, but lazily. I can define-condition a condition (have-value) to use for yield-like behavior, and I can run it in a single loop, and it works great. I'm defining the operations the same way, looping through the inputs: (defun count-records (rows) (loop for count from 0 for row in rows do (signal 'have-value :value `(:count ,count @,row)))) The trouble is if I want to string together several operations, and run them. My first attempt at writing a dispatcher for these looks something like: (let ((next-op ...)) ;; pick an op from the set of all ops (loop (handler-bind ((have-value (...))) ;; records output from operation (setq next-op ...) ;; pick a new next-op (call next-op))) But restarts have only dynamic extent: each operation will have the same restart names. The restart isn't a Lisp object I can store, to store the state of a function: it's something you call by name (symbol) inside the handler block, not a continuation you can store for later use. Is it possible to do something like I want here? Or am I better off just making each operation function explicitly look at its input queue, and explicitly place values on the output queue?

    Read the article

  • How can I spot subtle Lisp syntax mistakes?

    - by Marius Andersen
    I'm a newbie playing around with Lisp (actually, Emacs Lisp). It's a lot of fun, except when I seem to run into the same syntax mistakes again and again. For instance, here's something I've encountered several times. I have some cond form, like (cond ((foo bar) (qux quux)) ((or corge (grault warg)) (fred) (t xyzzy))) and the default clause, which returns xyzzy, is never carried out, because it's actually nested inside the previous clause: (cond ((foo bar) (qux quux)) ((or corge (grault warg)) (fred)) (t xyzzy)) It's difficult for me to see such errors when the difference in indentation is only one space. Does this get easier with time? I also have problems when there's a large distance between the (mal-)indented line and the line it should be indented against. let forms with a lot of complex bindings, for example, or an unless form with a long conditional: (defun test () (unless (foo bar (qux quux) (or corge (grault warg) (fred)))) xyzzy) It turns out xyzzy was never inside the unless form at all: (defun test () (unless (foo bar (qux quux) (or corge (grault warg) (fred))) xyzzy)) I auto-indent habitually and use parenthesis highlighting to avoid counting parentheses. For the most part it works like a breeze, but occasionally, I discover my syntax mistakes only by debugging. What can I do?

    Read the article

  • dates and times in emacs lisp

    - by Stephen
    Hi, I understand emacs lisp is great for handling dates and times, but does it have a function to convert strings to internal representation of integers using formats like %Y, %m, %d, %H, %M, %S, and so on? And also, in the emacs reference manual, it says that times are lists of two or three integers, but is there a more formal specification or description? ~ Thanks ~

    Read the article

  • Lisp, OCaml or what for Runge Kutta?

    - by Eelvex
    Which language would you propose for solving a system with: first order differential equations complex variables N-dimensions using 4th order Runge Kutta or the like. Speed matters a lot but would sacrifice for: Elegant (clean and short) code Flexibility + scalability I'm mostly between a Lisp and OCaml but any other suggestion is welcomed. Thanks!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >