I'm using Nyquist, a music composition extension of XLISP. To this point I
have not needed Object Oriented Programing but now have problem where oo is
a good fit. My problem is that the XLISP docs are rather terse regarding
how to create/use new classes objects etc. Does any one know of tuturials
or more detailed documentation in this regard ?
Thanks in advance
Steven Jones
Nyquist may be found at
http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/project/music/web/music.software.html
sj <·······@swbell.net> writes:
> I'm using Nyquist, a music composition extension of XLISP. To this point I
> have not needed Object Oriented Programing but now have problem where oo is
> a good fit. My problem is that the XLISP docs are rather terse regarding
> how to create/use new classes objects etc. Does any one know of tuturials
> or more detailed documentation in this regard ?
XLISP is quite Common Lisp-like but its substantially non-compliant
with the spec. If you stick with defstruct, you'll be able to achieve
quite a lot without fighting much with XLISP. What part of your
project requires oo?
If you want to learn Common Lisp OO, I think its likely better to work
with CLISP/CMUCL or some of the free demo versions of the commercial
implementations.
Gregm
sj wrote:
> I'm using Nyquist, a music composition extension of XLISP. To this point I
> have not needed Object Oriented Programing but now have problem where oo is
> a good fit. My problem is that the XLISP docs are rather terse regarding
> how to create/use new classes objects etc. Does any one know of tuturials
> or more detailed documentation in this regard ?
>
> Thanks in advance
> Steven Jones
>
> Nyquist may be found at
> http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/project/music/web/music.software.html
Hi,
Someone suggested this free online book to me the other day. I have not
had a chance to read it yet, but I hear it is very good and it got good
reviews at amazon.
http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/LispBook/
Paul
On Sun, Jan 19, 2003 at 11:00:00AM +0000, Paul O'Donnell wrote:
> sj wrote:
> > I'm using Nyquist, a music composition extension of XLISP. To this point I
> Someone suggested this free online book to me the other day. I have not
> http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/LispBook/
This is a book for Common Lisp, whereas the OP is looking for
information on XLISP, which is a different language. Hope that clears
up any possible confusion.
--
; Matthew Danish <·······@andrew.cmu.edu>
; OpenPGP public key: C24B6010 on keyring.debian.org
; Signed or encrypted mail welcome.
; "There is no dark side of the moon really; matter of fact, it's all dark."
Matthew Danish wrote:
> This is a book for Common Lisp, whereas the OP is looking for
> information on XLISP, which is a different language. Hope that clears
> up any possible confusion.
>
Yes I specifically need info on XLISP not Common Lisp. XLISP implements OO
in a completely different manner than CLOS. I could be wrong but I believe
XLISP pre dates Common Lisp by a few years.
sj wrote:
>
> Matthew Danish wrote:
>
> > This is a book for Common Lisp, whereas the OP is looking for
> > information on XLISP, which is a different language. Hope that clears
> > up any possible confusion.
> >
>
> Yes I specifically need info on XLISP not Common Lisp. XLISP implements OO
> in a completely different manner than CLOS. I could be wrong but I believe
> XLISP pre dates Common Lisp by a few years.
I'm relying on memory here, but ISTR that XLisp's native OO
system was prototype-based, completely unlike CLOS (or even Flavors).
The rest of XLisp (or at least XLispStat) /was/ pretty close to
Common Lisp, and I managed to get Closette to compile and run
on XLispStat, so you can probably do this with a vanilla XLisp
without the statistical extensions. So I'd recommend you use
Closette (the subset of CLOS that's developed in The Art of the
MetaObject Protocol) with XLisp.
Le Hibou
--
Dalinian: Lisp. Java. Which one sounds sexier?
RevAaron: Definitely Lisp. Lisp conjures up images of hippy coders,
drugs, sex, and rock & roll. Late nights at Berkeley, coding in
Lisp fueled by LSD. Java evokes a vision of a stereotypical nerd,
with no life or social skills.
Donald Fisk wrote:
> sj wrote:
>>
>> Matthew Danish wrote:
>>
>> > This is a book for Common Lisp, whereas the OP is looking for
>> > information on XLISP, which is a different language. Hope that clears
>> > up any possible confusion.
>> >
>>
>> Yes I specifically need info on XLISP not Common Lisp. XLISP implements
>> OO
>> in a completely different manner than CLOS. I could be wrong but I
>> believe XLISP pre dates Common Lisp by a few years.
>
> I'm relying on memory here, but ISTR that XLisp's native OO
> system was prototype-based, completely unlike CLOS (or even Flavors).
> The rest of XLisp (or at least XLispStat) /was/ pretty close to
> Common Lisp, and I managed to get Closette to compile and run
> on XLispStat, so you can probably do this with a vanilla XLisp
> without the statistical extensions. So I'd recommend you use
> Closette (the subset of CLOS that's developed in The Art of the
> MetaObject Protocol) with XLisp.
>
> Le Hibou
This is the first I've heard of Closette but from my brief excursions on the
net it looks like a good solution. Truthfully I would rather spend my
efforts with the more common (no pun intended) CLOS then the arcane OO of
XLISP
Thanks for the advice
Steven Jones
On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 01:34:12 GMT, sj <·······@swbell.net> wrote:
>Donald Fisk wrote:
>
>> sj wrote:
>>>
>>> Matthew Danish wrote:
>>>
>>> > This is a book for Common Lisp, whereas the OP is looking for
>>> > information on XLISP, which is a different language. Hope that clears
>>> > up any possible confusion.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Yes I specifically need info on XLISP not Common Lisp. XLISP implements
>>> OO
>>> in a completely different manner than CLOS. I could be wrong but I
>>> believe XLISP pre dates Common Lisp by a few years.
>>
>> I'm relying on memory here, but ISTR that XLisp's native OO
>> system was prototype-based, completely unlike CLOS (or even Flavors).
>> The rest of XLisp (or at least XLispStat) /was/ pretty close to
>> Common Lisp, and I managed to get Closette to compile and run
>> on XLispStat, so you can probably do this with a vanilla XLisp
>> without the statistical extensions. So I'd recommend you use
>> Closette (the subset of CLOS that's developed in The Art of the
>> MetaObject Protocol) with XLisp.
Please note that the original xlisp has a different object system than
xlisp-stat. The xlisp-stats system is prototype based, but not the
system from xlisp. Closette can be made working under xlisp-stat, but
it is a different thing under the original xlisp.
>>
>> Le Hibou
>
>
>This is the first I've heard of Closette but from my brief excursions on the
>net it looks like a good solution. Truthfully I would rather spend my
>efforts with the more common (no pun intended) CLOS then the arcane OO of
>XLISP
>
>Thanks for the advice
>Steven Jones
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
email: marc dot hoffmann at users dot whh dot wau dot nl
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"see.signature" wrote:
>
> On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 01:34:12 GMT, sj <·······@swbell.net> wrote:
> >Donald Fisk wrote:
> >
> >> sj wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Matthew Danish wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > This is a book for Common Lisp, whereas the OP is looking for
> >>> > information on XLISP, which is a different language. Hope that clears
> >>> > up any possible confusion.
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> Yes I specifically need info on XLISP not Common Lisp. XLISP implements
> >>> OO
> >>> in a completely different manner than CLOS. I could be wrong but I
> >>> believe XLISP pre dates Common Lisp by a few years.
> >>
> >> I'm relying on memory here, but ISTR that XLisp's native OO
> >> system was prototype-based, completely unlike CLOS (or even Flavors).
> >> The rest of XLisp (or at least XLispStat) /was/ pretty close to
> >> Common Lisp, and I managed to get Closette to compile and run
> >> on XLispStat, so you can probably do this with a vanilla XLisp
> >> without the statistical extensions. So I'd recommend you use
> >> Closette (the subset of CLOS that's developed in The Art of the
> >> MetaObject Protocol) with XLisp.
>
> Please note that the original xlisp has a different object system than
> xlisp-stat. The xlisp-stats system is prototype based, but not the
> system from xlisp. Closette can be made working under xlisp-stat, but
> it is a different thing under the original xlisp.
I was unaware of this. However, my idea was to ignore the built-in
object system and just run Closette on top of the plain non-OO XLisp.
So the difference between XLisp and XLispStat's object system becomes
moot. There may be some effort needed bridging the gap between
XLisp and Common Lisp, but there's a file called newcl.lisp which
comes with Closette and which should be helpful. The only difficulty
I can see is if XLisp's package system is incompatible.
Le Hibou
--
Dalinian: Lisp. Java. Which one sounds sexier?
RevAaron: Definitely Lisp. Lisp conjures up images of hippy coders,
drugs, sex, and rock & roll. Late nights at Berkeley, coding in
Lisp fueled by LSD. Java evokes a vision of a stereotypical nerd,
with no life or social skills.
On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 14:20:44 +0000, Donald Fisk
<················@enterprise.net> wrote:
>"see.signature" wrote:
>>
>> Please note that the original xlisp has a different object system than
>> xlisp-stat. The xlisp-stats system is prototype based, but not the
>> system from xlisp. Closette can be made working under xlisp-stat, but
>> it is a different thing under the original xlisp.
>
>I was unaware of this. However, my idea was to ignore the built-in
>object system and just run Closette on top of the plain non-OO XLisp.
>So the difference between XLisp and XLispStat's object system becomes
>moot. There may be some effort needed bridging the gap between
>XLisp and Common Lisp, but there's a file called newcl.lisp which
>comes with Closette and which should be helpful. The only difficulty
>I can see is if XLisp's package system is incompatible.
>
>Le Hibou
You are right in pointing out that the specific object system to use is
not important when using closette. What I also want to say is that
Xlisp-Stat is "more" conforming to common lisp than the original xlisp.
Xlisp-Stat has a relative conforming package system. For the original
question of using closs for nyquist, a xlisp based system, using
Xlisp-stat is not easy feasible. There are differences in the byte
code compilers and interpreters, ffi libraries.... Nyquist is tightly
coupled to the original xlisp.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
email: marc dot hoffmann at users dot whh dot wau dot nl
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll try to answer any questions you might have. Either post them here or
send them to me privately.
David Betz
·····@xlisper.mv.com
"sj" <·······@swbell.net> wrote in message
····························@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
> I'm using Nyquist, a music composition extension of XLISP. To this point I
> have not needed Object Oriented Programing but now have problem where oo
is
> a good fit. My problem is that the XLISP docs are rather terse regarding
> how to create/use new classes objects etc. Does any one know of tuturials
> or more detailed documentation in this regard ?
>
> Thanks in advance
> Steven Jones
>
> Nyquist may be found at
>
http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/project/music/web/music.software.html