I wish to write an IDE for clisp, mainly to develop the editor under
VC/MFC,but I want to call the complier and make a command interactive
window using the text edit control. How can I achieve that? how can I
call clisp's components? I failed to fetch some useful information from
the release of clisp, please tell me some overall steps to do that,
thank you!
workaholic wrote:
> I wish to write an IDE for clisp, mainly to develop the editor under
> VC/MFC,but I want to call the complier and make a command interactive
I don't want to divert the thread too far away from the OPs original
question but if one were to develop an IDE in Lisp itself, is it
acceptable that the IDE is running in the same REPL/image as the Lisp
system?
I only ask as over the years I've never really quite got on with Emacs
so despite the great features that Slime has, I'm not keen on using it.
In fact, almost the first thing I did when I started to learn CL was to
write a trivial program using LTk that looked a bit like a minimal
DrScheme and I currently use this to interract with my Lisp system.
I have been toying with the idea of working on this further to make it
useful to others but firstly I'm unsure if the approach of having the
IDE running in the same image is a good one (outside of say Smalltalk)
and secondly, I realize I'd most likely get ridiculed by the Lisp pros
for not just using Emacs. (It may be that this would only be useful to
newbies like myself as to be honest, I very nearly decided to learn
Scheme over CL purely based on how convenient DrScheme is).
Any comments or suggestions would be very interesting, even if it's to
tell me I'm totally wasting my time!
Phil
From: Peder O. Klingenberg
Subject: Re: How can I do if I want to write an IDE for clisp?
Date:
Message-ID: <ksodqwwvon.fsf@beto.netfonds.no>
···············@gmail.com writes:
> I don't want to divert the thread too far away from the OPs original
> question but if one were to develop an IDE in Lisp itself, is it
> acceptable that the IDE is running in the same REPL/image as the Lisp
> system?
Very much acceptable, I would say. The Lispworks IDE, for instance,
is running in the same image as the code you would write. I don't
know about ACL and Corman. Having the IDE inside you image is nice
and straightforward way of achieving the tight integration you want
between your development image and your IDE.
...Peder...
--
I wish a new life awaited _me_ in some off-world colony.
From: Troels Henriksen
Subject: Re: How can I do if I want to write an IDE for clisp?
Date:
Message-ID: <87fyc831vj.fsf@sigkill.dk>
·····@news.klingenberg.no (Peder O. Klingenberg) writes:
> Very much acceptable, I would say. The Lispworks IDE, for instance,
> is running in the same image as the code you would write.
I'm curious about how exactly this works - I take it that LispWorks
users do not usually hack the IDE while it is running, and thus do not
end up in a situation with a hosed development environment. But if
they were to "customize", say, the LispWorks editor to be somehow
unusable, for example by rebinding all the self-insertion commands,
does LispWorks then have some sort of emergency switch that can give
the programmer some minimal tools to fix the mess?
Also, what happens when you evaluate code from the editor? Does it run
in a new thread, or in a dedicated "evaluation thread" of some sort?
Surely, something must be in place to prevent infinite loops from
rendering the editor unusable.
--
\ Troels "Athas"
/\ Henriksen
From: Bill Atkins
Subject: Re: How can I do if I want to write an IDE for clisp?
Date:
Message-ID: <m264d46wn4.fsf@bertrand.local>
Troels Henriksen <·····@sigkill.dk> writes:
> ·····@news.klingenberg.no (Peder O. Klingenberg) writes:
>
>> Very much acceptable, I would say. The Lispworks IDE, for instance,
>> is running in the same image as the code you would write.
>
> I'm curious about how exactly this works - I take it that LispWorks
> users do not usually hack the IDE while it is running, and thus do not
> end up in a situation with a hosed development environment. But if
> they were to "customize", say, the LispWorks editor to be somehow
> unusable, for example by rebinding all the self-insertion commands,
> does LispWorks then have some sort of emergency switch that can give
> the programmer some minimal tools to fix the mess?
Not that I know of, but doesn't Emacs+SLIME work the same way? I
customize the editor as it's running, much as I do with Emacs.
> Also, what happens when you evaluate code from the editor? Does it run
> in a new thread, or in a dedicated "evaluation thread" of some sort?
Yes.
From: Troels Henriksen
Subject: Re: How can I do if I want to write an IDE for clisp?
Date:
Message-ID: <87irh3r5hc.fsf@sigkill.dk>
Bill Atkins <······@rpi.edu> writes:
> Not that I know of, but doesn't Emacs+SLIME work the same way?
No, if you write some CL code that makes the Lisp image go totallty
haywire, you just restart Lisp and reconnect. Your editor (Emacs)
keeps on running without losing state. You cannot damage Emacs from
CL.
--
\ Troels "Athas"
/\ Henriksen
Troels Henriksen wrote:
> Bill Atkins <······@rpi.edu> writes:
>
> > Not that I know of, but doesn't Emacs+SLIME work the same way?
>
> No, if you write some CL code that makes the Lisp image go totallty
> haywire, you just restart Lisp and reconnect. Your editor (Emacs)
> keeps on running without losing state. You cannot damage Emacs from
> CL.
OK, but you had specifically asked what would happen if changes you
made to the IDE broke it. If you break the IDE, then....the IDE will
break; any Emacs suffers from this problem by the very nature of Emacs.
If you write code that accidentally triggers an infinte loop, then,
yes, the IDE will get hosed. However, you can almost always recover
from this by opening the Processes dialog and killing the thread in
which your infinite loop is running. You can also press Debug instead
of Kill to break the thread and attach the debugger to it. Then you
can find out *why* it's in an infinite loop in the first place.
HTH,
Bill
> Very much acceptable, I would say. The Lispworks IDE, for instance,
As the designer of a ruby/python IDE i would say not very much
acceptable.
If there is a deadlock the whole IDE hangs. If you develop c level
extensions it is even
a more dangerous game to run them during development in the IDE.
It is much more work to integrate an image from another process but it
is worth the time.
From: Bill Atkins
Subject: Re: How can I do if I want to write an IDE for clisp?
Date:
Message-ID: <m2irh0bsys.fsf@bertrand.local>
"llothar" <·······@web.de> writes:
>> Very much acceptable, I would say. The Lispworks IDE, for instance,
>
> As the designer of a ruby/python IDE i would say not very much
> acceptable.
> If there is a deadlock the whole IDE hangs. If you develop c level
> extensions it is even
> a more dangerous game to run them during development in the IDE.
>
> It is much more work to integrate an image from another process but it
> is worth the time.
I don't think a separate process is that much of a win. If I hose my
Lisp image and have to restart it, the IDE isn't much use to me until
I bring the Lisp image back to where it was before the restart. So
that's not much of an improvement over restarting the IDE and then
bringing the image back to where it was.
Bill Atkins <······@rpi.edu> wrote:
> I don't think a separate process is that much of a win. If I hose my
> Lisp image and have to restart it, the IDE isn't much use to me until
> I bring the Lisp image back to where it was before the restart. So
> that's not much of an improvement over restarting the IDE and then
> bringing the image back to where it was.
You also need to bring the IDE state back to where it was, which will
probably be a lot more work than bringing the Lisp image back to where
it was. The state that would be lost by a sudden IDE crash would
include things like:
* Open file buffers
* Open frames/windows
* Repl history
* Temporary buffers
* Buffer undo history
* Buffer stack order
When using Slime, I restart the lisp image several times a day for
various reasons, and don't feel it's much of a bother. On the other
hand, having an Emacs instance that has been running for a couple of
months crash is a major inconvenience.
--
Juho Snellman
From: Peder O. Klingenberg
Subject: Re: How can I do if I want to write an IDE for clisp?
Date:
Message-ID: <ksd5779agu.fsf@beto.netfonds.no>
"llothar" <·······@web.de> writes:
> If there is a deadlock the whole IDE hangs. If you develop c level
> extensions it is even a more dangerous game to run them during
> development in the IDE.
Good point. I have even been dealing with some FFI code lately, and
as a consequence my current dev-image has an uptime of only 10 days,
so I should have though of that. I can only excuse myself with the
fact that I don't actually use the lispworks editor, I use
Emacs/Slime, so I didn't notice the inconvenience it would have been
to restart my entire environment.
I think my original intent was that as at least one well-known IDE
provider includes the IDE in the running image, then presumably at
least _some_ people find it an acceptable idea.
Personally I haven't given it much thought before, but now that you
brought it to my attention, I'm very glad my emacs buffers survive a
hosed image.
...Peder...
--
Sl�v uten dop.
Peder O. Klingenberg wrote:
> Personally I haven't given it much thought before, but now that you
> brought it to my attention, I'm very glad my emacs buffers survive a
> hosed image.
Although there seems to be about a 60:40 split in favor of running the
editor in another image, I'm not currently an advanced enough Lisp
programmer to take this on so will likely stick within the same image.
What I initially set out to do was to write something which I could use
to interact with my Lisp system that was more powerful than using the
REPL + readline but not as much of an intellectual overhead as taking
on Emacs + Slime + Common Lisp all in one go. In other words it was a
desire to focus more on Lisp than the surrounding tools, no matter how
good they are.
Obviously there's an element of ignoring good advice here but over the
years I've used Emacs (and Vim) on many occasions so it's not just a
knee jerk reaction (though probably is a bit I guess).
What I've come up with so far comprises only 75 lines of CL (+ a 6 line
addition to LTk) so clearly isn't suitable for any sort of real work.
I'll probably continue working on it in order to learn Lisp and if it
gets to a point where it could be useful to other people then I'll put
it up somewhere.
(Apologies for this overly defensive post but I don't know if I could
handle some of the comments on this thread as calmly as Pascal did...)
Phil
···············@gmail.com writes:
> Although there seems to be about a 60:40 split in favor of running the
> editor in another image, I'm not currently an advanced enough Lisp
> programmer to take this on so will likely stick within the same image.
Swank (available in the SLIME distribution) will handle a lot of this
for you.
···············@gmail.com writes:
> workaholic wrote:
>> I wish to write an IDE for clisp, mainly to develop the editor under
>> VC/MFC,but I want to call the complier and make a command interactive
>
> I don't want to divert the thread too far away from the OPs original
> question but if one were to develop an IDE in Lisp itself, is it
> acceptable that the IDE is running in the same REPL/image as the Lisp
> system?
Emacs does it, without threads. With threads, it's even more acceptable.
Now, you should realize that when you are programming in any language,
but for example, let's say C on a unix system, you are always
developing inside the IDE for the IDE itself. The IDE being the whole
unix system.
The boundaries between kernel and user processes, and between the
various user processes are purely conventional. All there is is a Von
Neumann machine. That to read or modify some data you have to use a
JSR or an INT microinstruction is irrelevant.
The only difference, is that if you expect your subroutine to fail,
it's better if it runs in a different address space, a different
process, so you can go on safely and possibly retry.
For subroutines written in C, we do indeed expect that they fail
catastrophically and overwrite random bits of memory. So it's good to
have them run in different processes.
For lisp subroutines, we don't expect them to fail, and even if they
have bugs, we know that the lisp virtual machine won't let it
overwrite random bits of memory, and even if it does modify some
bindings, we know that the lisp virtual machine won't allow it to
rebind anything but some valid lisp object. Therefore it's perfectly
viable to run and debug several lisp programs inside the same address
space, like emacs or other lisp implementation do.
> I only ask as over the years I've never really quite got on with Emacs
> so despite the great features that Slime has, I'm not keen on using it.
> In fact, almost the first thing I did when I started to learn CL was to
> write a trivial program using LTk that looked a bit like a minimal
> DrScheme and I currently use this to interract with my Lisp system.
>
> I have been toying with the idea of working on this further to make it
> useful to others but firstly I'm unsure if the approach of having the
> IDE running in the same image is a good one (outside of say Smalltalk)
> and secondly, I realize I'd most likely get ridiculed by the Lisp pros
> for not just using Emacs. (It may be that this would only be useful to
> newbies like myself as to be honest, I very nearly decided to learn
> Scheme over CL purely based on how convenient DrScheme is).
>
> Any comments or suggestions would be very interesting, even if it's to
> tell me I'm totally wasting my time!
Perhaps you'd like to work on climacs?
http://common-lisp.net/project/climacs/
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
PUBLIC NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY LAW: Any use of this product, in any
manner whatsoever, will increase the amount of disorder in the
universe. Although no liability is implied herein, the consumer is
warned that this process will ultimately lead to the heat death of
the universe.
Pascal Bourguignon wrote:
> rebind anything but some valid lisp object. Therefore it's perfectly
> viable to run and debug several lisp programs inside the same address
> space, like emacs or other lisp implementation do.
OK, well this is encouraging to hear, thanks. I may try to go a little
further with this project.
> > I only ask as over the years I've never really quite got on with Emacs
> > so despite the great features that Slime has, I'm not keen on using it.
> Perhaps you'd like to work on climacs?
> http://common-lisp.net/project/climacs/
Certainly when I get a little further with my Lisp learning then I'd
like to contribute to an existing project but it's still early days for
me.
Many thanks,
Phil
Pascal Bourguignon schrieb:
> For lisp subroutines, we don't expect them to fail, and even if they
> have bugs, we know that the lisp virtual machine won't let it
> overwrite random bits of memory, and even if it does modify some
> bindings, we know that the lisp virtual machine won't allow it to
> rebind anything but some valid lisp object. Therefore it's perfectly
> viable to run and debug several lisp programs inside the same address
> space, like emacs or other lisp implementation do.
This is the third time that i realize that you write completey
bullshit. I can't believe that you ever worked outside a university or
on anything larger then a hello-world. But for this you very convinced
that your arguments are right.
Ever heared about meta programming? A perfect way to take influence on
whatever is running in the image. I mentioned native extensions as
well. Then think about namespace clashs, and yes they will appear in
reality. Think about problems with loading and unloading code. What if
there is some more tight control of the garbage collector (turing off
and crashing before turning on again) etc.
Are your really such an ignorant french guy? I found this disussion
about reality in the past with the SmallEiffel team which are also a
group of french incompetent idiots working at Loria.Sorry for this, no
rassism intended, but maybe it's a side effect of the french education
system (which totally sucks by the way with it's so called elite
schools).
"llothar" <·······@web.de> writes:
> Pascal Bourguignon schrieb:
>
>> For lisp subroutines, we don't expect them to fail, and even if they
>> have bugs, we know that the lisp virtual machine won't let it
>> overwrite random bits of memory, and even if it does modify some
>> bindings, we know that the lisp virtual machine won't allow it to
>> rebind anything but some valid lisp object. Therefore it's perfectly
>> viable to run and debug several lisp programs inside the same address
>> space, like emacs or other lisp implementation do.
>
>
> This is the third time that i realize that you write completey
> bullshit. I can't believe that you ever worked outside a university or
> on anything larger then a hello-world. But for this you very convinced
> that your arguments are right.
Yes, I write bullshit. But my bullshit is prooved in practice by
millions of instances of emacs running for happy users.
> Ever heared about meta programming? A perfect way to take influence on
> whatever is running in the image. I mentioned native extensions as
> well. Then think about namespace clashs, and yes they will appear in
> reality. Think about problems with loading and unloading code. What if
> there is some more tight control of the garbage collector (turing off
> and crashing before turning on again) etc.
>
> Are your really such an ignorant french guy?
Yes, I am. Just killfile me.
> I found this disussion
> about reality in the past with the SmallEiffel team which are also a
> group of french incompetent idiots working at Loria. Sorry for this, no
> rassism intended, but maybe it's a side effect of the french education
> system (which totally sucks by the way with it's so called elite
> schools).
Just try to keep well away from French territories (we still got some
crubs remaining all over the world). Just to be sure, stay in your
country. And if killfile is not enough, (after all, I'm not the only
ignorant French guy posting all over usernet), you could just delete
your newsreader and your webbrowser.
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
The world will now reboot. don't bother saving your artefacts.
Pascal Bourguignon schrieb:
> Just try to keep well away from French territories (we still got some
> crubs remaining all over the world). Just to be sure, stay in your
Yes, i know. I'm planning to move to New Caledonia for a year or two
(as long as
they are french oversea departments and there's no problem with work
permit)
but people there are much more open minded then you seem to be. Well -
i think they
don't have a university.
But get back to Lisp discussion. Any arguments from you against my
arguments?
···············@gmail.com> wrote:
+---------------
| I don't want to divert the thread too far away from the OPs original
| question but if one were to develop an IDE in Lisp itself, is it
| acceptable that the IDE is running in the same REPL/image as the Lisp
| system?
+---------------
In addition to the IDEs others have mentioned, CMUCL comes with
[well, you have to download the "cmucl-${platform}.extra.tar.bz2"
tarball and unpack it] a CLX-based editor called "Hemlock" and
a Motif-based graphical debugger, both of which run within the
image you're doing development in. So, yes, it's quite "acceptable".
-Rob
-----
Rob Warnock <····@rpw3.org>
627 26th Avenue <URL:http://rpw3.org/>
San Mateo, CA 94403 (650)572-2607
Well, thanks for your attention to my plan, but I still insist on
writing one, both for practising VC/MFC techniques and for an insight
into how the clisp organising itself and how it's working. I am not so
familiar with Linux and Emacs, and I have too much documents to edit
under Win XP. And LispWorks is good enough but it costs money, isn't
it? So can anyone help me? Maybe I should advise the clisp developers?
To tell the truth, Lisp intrigues me, but it seems too academic to earn
a good job, isn't it?(in my opinion,though some European company use it
to develop some project, but not so well-known enough).
On Nov 25, 10:00 am, "workaholic" <·······@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, thanks for your attention to my plan, but I still insist on
> writing one, both for practising VC/MFC techniques and for an insight
> into how the clisp organising itself and how it's working. I am not so
> familiar with Linux and Emacs, and I have too much documents to edit
> under Win XP. And LispWorks is good enough but it costs money, isn't
> it? So can anyone help me? Maybe I should advise the clisp developers?
> To tell the truth, Lisp intrigues me, but it seems too academic to earn
> a good job, isn't it?(in my opinion,though some European company use it
> to develop some project, but not so well-known enough).
I'm sure you could learn both C++ and CL together but it is a big task
if you're new to both (not sure from your posts if you are). The desire
to learn something in order to gain employment is completely
understandable but I'd then have to question your choice of MFC as,
legacy applications aside, it's not so popular anymore. There are other
GUI libraries that you could use with C++ (and probably in some cases
CL too) such as wxWidgets, Qt and GTK+. But knowing these won't
guarantee you a job either as none dominates the industry in the way
that MFC used to (the closest you'll likely get on the desktop is
probably Java+Swing unfortunately).
Phil
From: rydis (Martin Rydstr|m) @CD.Chalmers.SE
Subject: Re: How can I do if I want to write an IDE for clisp?
Date:
Message-ID: <w4c8xhxnyzp.fsf@rackham.cd.chalmers.se>
····@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) writes:
> ···············@gmail.com> wrote:
> +---------------
> | I don't want to divert the thread too far away from the OPs original
> | question but if one were to develop an IDE in Lisp itself, is it
> | acceptable that the IDE is running in the same REPL/image as the Lisp
> | system?
> +---------------
>
> In addition to the IDEs others have mentioned, CMUCL comes with
> [well, you have to download the "cmucl-${platform}.extra.tar.bz2"
> tarball and unpack it] a CLX-based editor called "Hemlock" and
> a Motif-based graphical debugger, both of which run within the
> image you're doing development in. So, yes, it's quite "acceptable".
Not really. The standard operating procedure for Hemlock is to do
the development in one or several slave lisps, possibly running on
different hosts. It is notably /not/ the case that you typically
eval stuff in the editor lisp. (There is an "Editor Mode" in which
stuff is eval'd in the editor lisp, but that's atypical.)
The debugger runs in whatever lisp you eval in, which, with a normal
Hemlock setup, means the slave lisp.
In my opinion, having the IDE crash if you break the lisp system you
hack on is very, very bad. (Not very many people seem to be using
Hemlock, so it's quite understandable that it's not very well-known.
I do use it as my main editor for lisp hacking.)
However, the fork "portable Hemlock" (a project that doesn't seem to
see much hacking at the moment) does not support connecting to slave
lisps, so there your description would be more fitting.
Regards,
',mr
--
rydis (Martin Rydstr�m) @CD.Chalmers.SE http://www.rydis.se
[Emacs] is written in Lisp, which is the only computer language that is
beautiful. -- Neal Stephenson, _In the Beginning was the Command Line_
···············@gmail.com skrev:
> I only ask as over the years I've never really quite got on with Emacs
> so despite the great features that Slime has, I'm not keen on using it.
> In fact, almost the first thing I did when I started to learn CL was to
> write a trivial program using LTk that looked a bit like a minimal
> DrScheme and I currently use this to interract with my Lisp system.
>
> I have been toying with the idea of working on this further to make it
> useful to others but firstly I'm unsure if the approach of having the
> IDE running in the same image is a good one (outside of say Smalltalk)
> and secondly, I realize I'd most likely get ridiculed by the Lisp pros
> for not just using Emacs. (It may be that this would only be useful to
> newbies like myself as to be honest, I very nearly decided to learn
> Scheme over CL purely based on how convenient DrScheme is).
>
> Any comments or suggestions would be very interesting, even if it's to
> tell me I'm totally wasting my time!
Programming Languages as Operating Systems
(or, Revenge of the Son of the Lisp Machine)
Matthew Flatt, Robert Bruce Findler, Shriram Krishnamurthi, Matthias
Felleisen
ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming, 1999
Abstract
The MrEd virtual machine serves both as the implementation platform
for the DrScheme programming environment, and as the underlying Scheme
engine for executing expressions and programs entered into DrScheme's
read-eval-print loop. We describe the key elements of the MrEd virtual
machine for building a programming environment, and we step through the
implementation of a miniature version of DrScheme in MrEd. More
generally, we show how MrEd defines a high-level operating system for
graphical programs.
<http://www.cs.brown.edu/~sk/Publications/Papers/Published/ffkf-mred/paper.ps>
--
Jens Axel S�gaard
On 24 Nov 2006 09:01:02 -0800, "workaholic" <·······@gmail.com> tried to confuse
everyone with this message:
>
>I wish to write an IDE for clisp, mainly to develop the editor under
>VC/MFC,but I want to call the complier and make a command interactive
>window using the text edit control. How can I achieve that? how can I
>call clisp's components? I failed to fetch some useful information from
>the release of clisp, please tell me some overall steps to do that,
>thank you!
>
Check out SLIME, particularly its Swank component - it allows to create a
Lisp-side server that would listen to commands and make Lisp execute them.
http://common-lisp.net/project/slime/
--
|Don't believe this - you're not worthless ,gr---------.ru
|It's us against millions and we can't take them all... | ue il |
|But we can take them on! | @ma |
| (A Wilhelm Scream - The Rip) |______________|
"workaholic" <·······@gmail.com> writes:
> I wish to write an IDE for clisp, mainly to develop the editor under
> VC/MFC,but I want to call the complier and make a command interactive
> window using the text edit control. How can I achieve that? how can I
> call clisp's components? I failed to fetch some useful information from
> the release of clisp, please tell me some overall steps to do that,
> thank you!
There's already a VisualCLisp. Perhaps you can work on it?
http://ciapek.uci.agh.edu.pl/~kwlodarc/VisualCLisp/en.htm
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
In deep sleep hear sound,
Cat vomit hairball somewhere.
Will find in morning.
From: Sam Steingold
Subject: Re: How can I do if I want to write an IDE for clisp?
Date:
Message-ID: <m3zmac3zov.fsf@loiso.podval.org>
> * workaholic <·······@tznvy.pbz> [2006-11-24 09:01:02 -0800]:
>
> I wish to write an IDE for clisp, mainly to develop the editor under
> VC/MFC,but I want to call the complier and make a command interactive
> window using the text edit control. How can I achieve that? how can I
> call clisp's components? I failed to fetch some useful information
> from the release of clisp, please tell me some overall steps to do
> that, thank you!
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.clisp.general:11554
--
Sam Steingold (http://sds.podval.org/) on Fedora Core release 5 (Bordeaux)
http://ffii.org http://honestreporting.com http://israelunderattack.slide.com
http://pmw.org.il http://memri.org http://iris.org.il http://dhimmi.com
If you know that you know nothing, you know too much.
From: Ken Tilton
Subject: Re: How can I do if I want to write an IDE for clisp?
Date:
Message-ID: <fMRah.94$Mg.83@newsfe11.lga>
Sam Steingold wrote:
>>* workaholic <·······@tznvy.pbz> [2006-11-24 09:01:02 -0800]:
>>
>>I wish to write an IDE for clisp, mainly to develop the editor under
>>VC/MFC,but I want to call the complier and make a command interactive
>>window using the text edit control. How can I achieve that? how can I
>>call clisp's components? I failed to fetch some useful information
>>from the release of clisp, please tell me some overall steps to do
>>that, thank you!
>
>
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.clisp.general:11554
>
You did not like?: http://common-lisp.net/project/cells-gtk/
Two years earlier, and OS X, too.
Oh, I know, this is the Lisp community, if we are not reinventing Lisp
itself we are duplicating some other unfinished library that could use
support by unfinishing the same library from scratch. I think the
dullards using Python and Java lack this knack, which is why they end up
saddled with so many diverse polished libraries. Poor sods.
kt
--
Cells: http://common-lisp.net/project/cells/
"I'll say I'm losing my grip, and it feels terrific."
-- Smiling husband to scowling wife, New Yorker cartoon
From: Ken Tilton
Subject: Re: How can I do if I want to write an IDE for clisp?
Date:
Message-ID: <tORah.95$Mg.15@newsfe11.lga>
Ken Tilton wrote:
>
>
> Sam Steingold wrote:
>
>>> * workaholic <·······@tznvy.pbz> [2006-11-24 09:01:02 -0800]:
>>>
>>> I wish to write an IDE for clisp, mainly to develop the editor under
>>> VC/MFC,but I want to call the complier and make a command interactive
>>> window using the text edit control. How can I achieve that? how can I
>>> call clisp's components? I failed to fetch some useful information
>>> from the release of clisp, please tell me some overall steps to do
>>> that, thank you!
>>
>>
>>
>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.clisp.general:11554
>>
>
> You did not like?: http://common-lisp.net/project/cells-gtk/
>
> Two years earlier, and OS X, too.
Not OS X. I was thinking of Cello and Celtk.
kt
--
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