I would like to thank those in the community who have vastly improved
asdf-install functionality by finding/fixing links and making more
libraries asdf compatible. Lately (within the past couple of months, on
the latest sbcl) it has been a pleasure to read about a library on
c.l.l., install it with a single call, and start playing with it. No
muss, no fuss.
I know things aren't perfect in CL land but I think that there has been
an excess of whining and gnashing of teeth lately -- I'm probably as
much a noob as anyone out there and I've managed to build a number of
(internal only, alas) significant projects in CL. It Just Works. Thanks
again!
·············@f5.com. writes:
> I would like to thank those in the community who have vastly improved
> asdf-install functionality by finding/fixing links and making more
> libraries asdf compatible. Lately (within the past couple of months, on
> the latest sbcl) it has been a pleasure to read about a library on
> c.l.l., install it with a single call, and start playing with it. No
> muss, no fuss.
>
> I know things aren't perfect in CL land but I think that there has been
> an excess of whining and gnashing of teeth lately -- I'm probably as
> much a noob as anyone out there and I've managed to build a number of
> (internal only, alas) significant projects in CL. It Just Works. Thanks
> again!
You only refer to "CL" -- never "Lisp", so I assume there must have been
some misunderstanding on your part. Around here, CL means Common Lisp --
an ancient programming language so complex and full of warts that no
"noob", as you call yourself, can possibly understand it. And the lack of
a single implementation or ANSI standard threads, sockets, GUI frameworks,
and other modern conveniences renders the language useless anyway.
Don't feel too bad -- it's a common mistake. But out of curiousity, what
is the "CL" language you were referring to? It sounds positively lovely.
:)
Deon Garrett wrote:
> You only refer to "CL" -- never "Lisp", so I assume there must have been
> some misunderstanding on your part. Around here, CL means Common Lisp --
> an ancient programming language so complex and full of warts that no
> "noob", as you call yourself, can possibly understand it. And the lack of
> a single implementation or ANSI standard threads, sockets, GUI frameworks,
> and other modern conveniences renders the language useless anyway.
>
> Don't feel too bad -- it's a common mistake. But out of curiousity, what
> is the "CL" language you were referring to? It sounds positively lovely.
Ack! I made another common noob mistake! I thought that Common Lisp
was a sensible modern ultra-hip programming language in the same class
as Parrot!
Please, I don't understand how I could've thought that, must be a total
complete misunderstanding, demonstrating my utter incompetence.
However, this CL thing sounds really familiar. I just can't seem to
(expand-acronym 'CL).
Common Laughs? Crudely Lisp? I'm sure I've used it regularly
recently. Must be getting senile.
best,
-tony
"AJ Rossini" <··········@gmail.com> writes:
> Deon Garrett wrote:
>
>> You only refer to "CL" -- never "Lisp", so I assume there must have been
>> some misunderstanding on your part. Around here, CL means Common Lisp --
>> an ancient programming language so complex and full of warts that no
>> "noob", as you call yourself, can possibly understand it. And the lack of
>> a single implementation or ANSI standard threads, sockets, GUI frameworks,
>> and other modern conveniences renders the language useless anyway.
>>
>> Don't feel too bad -- it's a common mistake. But out of curiousity, what
>> is the "CL" language you were referring to? It sounds positively lovely.
>
> Ack! I made another common noob mistake! I thought that Common Lisp
> was a sensible modern ultra-hip programming language in the same class
> as Parrot!
>
> Please, I don't understand how I could've thought that, must be a total
> complete misunderstanding, demonstrating my utter incompetence.
>
> However, this CL thing sounds really familiar. I just can't seem to
> (expand-acronym 'CL).
> Common Laughs? Crudely Lisp? I'm sure I've used it regularly
> recently. Must be getting senile.
>
or maybe just Cerebral Lethagy?
>
--
tcross (at) rapttech dot com dot au