Where is the manual on how to use this supposedly more powerful tool?
Eric Raymond disses lisp for python......but Paul Graham says its by
far the best.
gavino wrote:
> Where is the manual on how to use this supposedly more powerful tool?
> Eric Raymond disses lisp for python......but Paul Graham says its by
> far the best.
>
hmmm, you might have the details wrong. graham was talking before python
really was on its game, i think he is a big pythonista now. Lisp is
more a fun research thing, nothing you want to use for serious work.
Python and/or Ruby are what most of use for Real Work.
hth, kenny
--
Cells: http://common-lisp.net/project/cells/
"I'll say I'm losing my grip, and it feels terrific."
-- Smiling husband to scowling wife, New Yorker cartoon
"gavino" <········@yahoo.com> writes:
> Where is the manual on how to use this supposedly more powerful tool?
First off, clisp the name of a particular implementation of Common
Lisp. There are several more.
The language has a specification. See:
http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Front/index.htm
There are several books. See <http://www.cliki.net/Online%20Tutorial>.
Many people would recommend "Practical Common Lisp" in particular:
<http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/>.
--
Luís Oliveira
luismbo (@) gmail (.) com
http://student.dei.uc.pt/~lmoliv/
"gavino" <········@yahoo.com> writes:
> Where is the manual on how to use this supposedly more powerful tool?
> Eric Raymond disses lisp for python......but Paul Graham says its by
> far the best.
clisp's manual is at:
http://clisp.cons.org/impnotes/index.html
But you'll need the Common Lisp Reference:
http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Front/index.htm
and if you're asking this question it means you're a newbie, so you'll
need a tutorial too:
http://www-cgi.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/dst/www/LispBook/index.html
http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/
For more information:
http://www.cliki.net/index
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
NEW GRAND UNIFIED THEORY DISCLAIMER: The manufacturer may
technically be entitled to claim that this product is
ten-dimensional. However, the consumer is reminded that this
confers no legal rights above and beyond those applicable to
three-dimensional objects, since the seven new dimensions are
"rolled up" into such a small "area" that they cannot be
detected.
Interesting.
Is the tourestsky tutorial applicable to todays CLISP?
Pascal Bourguignon wrote:
> "gavino" <········@yahoo.com> writes:
>
> > Where is the manual on how to use this supposedly more powerful tool?
> > Eric Raymond disses lisp for python......but Paul Graham says its by
> > far the best.
>
> clisp's manual is at:
>
> http://clisp.cons.org/impnotes/index.html
>
> But you'll need the Common Lisp Reference:
>
> http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Front/index.htm
>
> and if you're asking this question it means you're a newbie, so you'll
> need a tutorial too:
>
> http://www-cgi.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/dst/www/LispBook/index.html
> http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/
>
> For more information:
>
> http://www.cliki.net/index
>
>
> --
> __Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
>
> NEW GRAND UNIFIED THEORY DISCLAIMER: The manufacturer may
> technically be entitled to claim that this product is
> ten-dimensional. However, the consumer is reminded that this
> confers no legal rights above and beyond those applicable to
> three-dimensional objects, since the seven new dimensions are
> "rolled up" into such a small "area" that they cannot be
> detected.
gavino wrote:
> SO you would completely reccomend lisp as the nicest programming tool
> even to someone new to programming? I really would liek to invest in
> learning the best thing if it really is better, but don't see many
> others using lisp it seems. I guess I am stubborn.
Gavino--
If by "stubborn" you mean your apparent willingness to accept
throw-away opinions of supposed experts or newsgroup postings
justifying the mass opinion over one's own thoughtful investigation, I
suggest a much better investment of your time would be to overcome your
own stubborness.
--Joe
"gavino" <········@yahoo.com> writes:
> SO you would completely reccomend lisp as the nicest programming tool
> even to someone new to programming?
Most definitely!
Since you're new to programming, I'd recommend to start with:
Common Lisp: A Gentle Introduction to Symbolic Computation
http://www-cgi.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/dst/www/LispBook/index.html
and read Practical Common Lisp
http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/
later.
> I really would like to invest in learning the best thing if it
> really is better, but don't see many others using lisp it seems.
> I guess I am stubborn.
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
"You can tell the Lisp programmers. They have pockets full of punch
cards with close parentheses on them." --> http://tinyurl.com/8ubpf
Pascal Bourguignon wrote:
> "gavino" <········@yahoo.com> writes:
>
> > SO you would completely reccomend lisp as the nicest programming tool
> > even to someone new to programming?
>
> Most definitely!
I'll provide some caveats:
* Getting your lisp environment up and running can be a painful
process. You can avoid much of this pain by using the 'lispbox'
distribution (http://www.gigamonkeys.com/lispbox/).
Anecdote: I have been using CLisp from Cygwin with SLIME (SLIME CVS
head from 2006-jan-20, also tried 2006-jun-20), rather than lispbox.
I recently upgraded from CLisp 2.35 to 2.38 and now SLIME is broken.
(stupid me -- why did I try to "fix" something that wasn't broken!!)
You don't want this sort of annoyance. If you stick with lispbox
you won't have it. It has been my experience that those other
languages you mention do a better job of making the environment easy
to setup.
* If you want to perform simple tasks then Perl or Python might be
better because they have huge well documented libraries that in many
cases will do 90% of the heavy lifting your program needs to do
(e.g. parse an XML document into a DOM and the provide methods for
operating on said DOM and translating the DOM back into XML).
--fj
funkyj wrote:
> Pascal Bourguignon wrote:
> > "gavino" <········@yahoo.com> writes:
> >
> > > SO you would completely reccomend lisp as the nicest programming tool
> > > even to someone new to programming?
> >
> > Most definitely!
>
> I'll provide some caveats:
>
> * Getting your lisp environment up and running can be a painful
> process. You can avoid much of this pain by using the 'lispbox'
> distribution (http://www.gigamonkeys.com/lispbox/).
>
> Anecdote: I have been using CLisp from Cygwin with SLIME (SLIME CVS
> head from 2006-jan-20, also tried 2006-jun-20), rather than lispbox.
> I recently upgraded from CLisp 2.35 to 2.38 and now SLIME is broken.
> (stupid me -- why did I try to "fix" something that wasn't broken!!)
> You don't want this sort of annoyance. If you stick with lispbox
> you won't have it. It has been my experience that those other
> languages you mention do a better job of making the environment easy
> to setup.
Your experience seems to be limited to one Lisp implementation.
>
> * If you want to perform simple tasks then Perl or Python might be
> better because they have huge well documented libraries that in many
> cases will do 90% of the heavy lifting your program needs to do
> (e.g. parse an XML document into a DOM and the provide methods for
> operating on said DOM and translating the DOM back into XML).
Why would any 'simple' task involve complex stuff like DOM and XML?
With Lisp you can get rid of XML and DOM for many practical
purposes.
>
>
> --fj
gavino wrote:
> SO you would completely recommend lisp as the nicest programming tool
> even to someone new to programming?
It depends. If the someone were interested in becoming a top-notch
software engineer
or computer scientist, then I'd recommend Lisp. If the someone simply
wants to hack
some dancing hamsters on his web page, or simplify some complex M$Word
operation,
I'd point them at a reference manual for the product they are using.
> I really would like to invest in
> learning the best thing if it really is better, but don't see many
> others using lisp it seems.
Does popularity matter that much to you? If so, I suggest Java, C, and
Visual Basic. They certainly aren't the nicest languages by a long
shot, but you'll have plenty of company for your misery.