From: cr88192
Subject: implementing lisp in an os...
Date: 
Message-ID: <uc9qer62fd707b@corp.supernews.com>
ok, in my experience I am far more of an os coder than a lisp 
compiler/interpretter coder, so the lisp based stuff is going slow.
my newest source contains a basic interpretter (which I have been working 
on/extending/fixing since I had posted it...).

(I have since redesigned calling/functions a bit, and had discovered that 
the interpretter was dynamically scoped...).
the code is mostly in c, as that is what I am most fammiliar with. spread 
around on my site is some info that tries to explain what I am trying to do.

ok, the interpretter is a little "schemish", but really that looks like it 
would be easier to implement right off.

ok, I lack any real specific problems right now, but mostly I am just 
interested if anyone has comments...
it can be found at the site at the bottom of the post.
I don't really mean to top post, but I haven't really seen an appropriate 
thread to place this in.

-- 
<·······@hotmail.com> <http://bgb1.hypermart.net/>

From: cr88192
Subject: Re: implementing lisp in an os...
Date: 
Message-ID: <uc9ttqeg2d9v67@corp.supernews.com>
possibly worth mentioning (though I forgot in last post). I do have a basic 
kernel, and my lisp stuff sits on top of that. the images floating around 
in the source should be usable (though getting it to recompile on a 
computer other than mine might take a little fiddling...).
I just wanted to make sure people don't think that *all* I have is an 
interpreter...

once lisp stuff generally exists and stabilizes then I will try to 
integrate it with other parts of the kernel. then maybe I can go and start 
working a little more on the rest of the kernel...

I am thinking: will lexical scope require binding/resolution to be done at 
parse time; or at "define" time (possibly by making and alternate copy of 
functions); or is there some better way to do it.
my interpreter currently just parses the s-expressions (which is good 
enough for my early practice...). the variables are resolved at 
interpretation time, and the scope is generated by calls. possibly for a 
lexical scope a function will have to point to its own bindings list.

sorry I don't know much.

-- 
<·······@hotmail.com> <http://bgb1.hypermart.net/>
From: Paulo J. Matos
Subject: Re: implementing lisp in an os...
Date: 
Message-ID: <20020425.014657.1939964443.2670@mega.ist.utl.pt>
Hi,
I don't know if you have ever tried  to search for LispOS on google but
if you do try you'll find a mail archive maybe. I think you would
appreciate to read some of the interesting posts...

Best regards,

Paulo


In article <··············@corp.supernews.com>, "cr88192"
<·······@hotmail.com> wrote:

> possibly worth mentioning (though I forgot in last post). I do have a
> basic kernel, and my lisp stuff sits on top of that. the images floating
> around in the source should be usable (though getting it to recompile on
> a computer other than mine might take a little fiddling...). I just
> wanted to make sure people don't think that *all* I have is an
> interpreter...
> 
> once lisp stuff generally exists and stabilizes then I will try to
> integrate it with other parts of the kernel. then maybe I can go and
> start working a little more on the rest of the kernel...
> 
> I am thinking: will lexical scope require binding/resolution to be done
> at parse time; or at "define" time (possibly by making and alternate
> copy of functions); or is there some better way to do it. my interpreter
> currently just parses the s-expressions (which is good enough for my
> early practice...). the variables are resolved at interpretation time,
> and the scope is generated by calls. possibly for a lexical scope a
> function will have to point to its own bindings list.
> 
> sorry I don't know much.
> 


-- 
Paulo J. Matos : pocm(_at_)rnl.ist.utl.pt
Instituto Superior Tecnico - Lisbon    
Software & Computer Engineering - A.I.
 - > http://www.rnl.ist.utl.pt/~pocm 
 ---	
	Yes, God had a deadline...
		So, He wrote it all in Lisp!
From: cr88192
Subject: Re: implementing lisp in an os...
Date: 
Message-ID: <ucev3t1gqi7384@corp.supernews.com>
> Hi,
> I don't know if you have ever tried  to search for LispOS on google but
> if you do try you'll find a mail archive maybe. I think you would
> appreciate to read some of the interesting posts...
> 
worthwhile tip...

since my post I have made things lexically scoped and started tying things 
together with other parts of the os...

have been imagining something similar to packages/sets for organization 
purposes, I have started to design things now. the concern: have them 
referred to by name, or treat them as objects and possibly allow predicates 
to select them. the second would be more difficult I would think for now, 
thus I will go with the first.

I was thinking of organizing the packages in a tree (much like a 
conventional fs, except that other structures could be built on).
a shell would bind certain packages to certain locations in the local space 
for convienience.
ie: "temp-user", "static-user", "temp-system", and "static-system", maybe 
"system-root".
each package could contain other packages and so forth...

or maybe they could be more like hash tables. it might be useful just to 
define a new system though.

for now there are just variables...

I am still planning the tag based access control stuff (which will probably 
have to be a property of variables...).

-- 
<·······@hotmail.com> <http://bgb1.hypermart.net/>