I'm interested in learning Lisp but I'm put off on the lack of cross platform support in open source CL implementations. I like the idea of leveraging .net for libraries and support for JIT compiling that the CLR has. I have a couple of questions:
Is there any code in dotLisp that prevents it from being run under mono?
Also,
What is preventing dotLisp from being ANSI compliant other then time/money/effort?
Thanks,
Dan
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I believe standard DotLisp has been tested under mono -- it was a goal of the original design. My suggested extra functions in extra.lisp may use some VB.NET libraries that are officially part of the .NET Framework, but may not necessarily be completely implemented in Mono yet -- I don't know for sure.
If you mean [ANSI] Common Lisp, it is mostly time/money/effort, but 1) the .NET Framework provides a lot of the functionality that you'd get from Common Lisp and 2) you'd want to implement compiling and Lisp-2 semantics in DotLisp before attempting to tackle more of Common Lisp.
However, to help convert existing CL code to DotLisp there are some 'basic' CL constructs that I've not yet attempted to rework in DotLisp, the biggest on one being the loop 'framework' -- it's almost a language of its own.
Finally, DotLisp is not really a good choice to learn Lisp with, because of the tight coupling with .NET and the alternate macro syntax (using '~' where CL uses ',').
Regards,
Mark Hurd, B.Sc.(Ma.)(Hons.)
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Hello,
I'm interested in learning Lisp but I'm put off on the lack of cross platform support in open source CL implementations. I like the idea of leveraging .net for libraries and support for JIT compiling that the CLR has. I have a couple of questions:
Is there any code in dotLisp that prevents it from being run under mono?
Also,
What is preventing dotLisp from being ANSI compliant other then time/money/effort?
Thanks,
Dan
I believe standard DotLisp has been tested under mono -- it was a goal of the original design. My suggested extra functions in extra.lisp may use some VB.NET libraries that are officially part of the .NET Framework, but may not necessarily be completely implemented in Mono yet -- I don't know for sure.
If you mean [ANSI] Common Lisp, it is mostly time/money/effort, but 1) the .NET Framework provides a lot of the functionality that you'd get from Common Lisp and 2) you'd want to implement compiling and Lisp-2 semantics in DotLisp before attempting to tackle more of Common Lisp.
However, to help convert existing CL code to DotLisp there are some 'basic' CL constructs that I've not yet attempted to rework in DotLisp, the biggest on one being the loop 'framework' -- it's almost a language of its own.
Finally, DotLisp is not really a good choice to learn Lisp with, because of the tight coupling with .NET and the alternate macro syntax (using '~' where CL uses ',').
Regards,
Mark Hurd, B.Sc.(Ma.)(Hons.)