how would one compare the abilities of common lisp vs icon?
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.icon/browse_thread/thread/73d77179f2bd4c0b/7cf932740368f962#7cf932740368f962
On Dec 20, 5:09 pm, gavino <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> how would one compare the abilities of common lisp vs icon?
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.icon/browse_thread/thread/73...
Hi Gavino,
Icon is a one-implementation language which was developed in order to
showcase a single feature, namely generators. Other than that, it is
unremarkable.
Now think about how silly that is: designing an entire programming
language implementation from scratch just to show generators in
action.
It's simply not practical to actually /use/ a different programming
language with a separate run-time for every feature that you might
want to use.
Note, by the way, that Python has also acquired Icon-like generators.
About a year and a half ago, a certain Frederic Jolliton posted a
simple implementation of Python-like generators in Common Lisp to the
newsgroup, based on Arnesi's CPS (continuation-passing style)
transformer.
See Message-ID: <··············@mau.intra.tuxee.net>
The Google Groups URL is http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.lisp/msg/81e2ef3b2a7f070a
This is probably a half-baked, incomplete generator implementation,
unlike what you find in Icon. But on the other hand, it's a just few
lines of Lisp posted to Usenet, whereas Icon is a big from-scratch
project written in C, which implements everything: lexical analyzer,
parser, all of the non-generator parts of the programming language,
library interfaces, etc.
Python generators also had to be hacked into Python's C kernel. If you
take that feature out, there is no way to write it in Python. But even
hacking generators at a low level in Python is a hundred times better
use of productive time than developing a whole language implementation
from scratch.
Many thanks for the link to Frederic Jolliton post about generators
Kaz, I showed how easy is to implement a simple generator and tree
walker in lisp using cl-cont http://tourdelisp.blogspot.com/2007/12/delimited-continuations-with-cl-cont.html
but I will look at Jolliton's post is it possible to generalize a
little bit more.
Weird group , Gavino's thread are troll thrash, but some replies to it
are pure gold.
Maybe every community needs somebody who is constantly asking stupid
questions, though they are annoying.
thanks again
Slobodan Blazeski
Slobodan Blazeski <·················@gmail.com> writes:
> Maybe every community needs somebody who is constantly asking stupid
> questions, though they are annoying.
There are no stupid questions!
--
Duane Rettig ·····@franz.com Franz Inc. http://www.franz.com/
555 12th St., Suite 1450 http://www.555citycenter.com/
Oakland, Ca. 94607 Phone: (510) 452-2000; Fax: (510) 452-0182
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 13:59:47 -0800 (PST), "j.oke" <········@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On 21 Dic, 02:09, gavino <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
>[...]
>
>Hi Gavino,
>
>could you plz solve this mystery: are you this guy: http://www.chri.it/
>
Better yet, he should go write some Lisp code and stop asking
ridiculous questions.
George
--
for email reply remove "/" from address