I would like to begin learning LISP soon. I have the book, "Common
LISP: The Language" by Guy L. Steele, Jr., printed in 1984 by Digital
Press (ISBN 0-932376-41-X). I'm wondering if this is a good book for
learning LISP. Is the content very much in agreement with the ANSI
LISP standard? And if not how much does it deviate and in which
topical areas? I have just downloaded the "Lisp in a Box" so I will be
using SBCL as my Lisp compiler.
Regards,
Zach
Zach wrote:
> I would like to begin learning LISP soon.
As Edi mentioned, it's not called "LISP" anymore. It's "Lisp".
> I have the book, "Common LISP: The Language"
> by Guy L. Steele, Jr., printed in 1984
Don't use that version, it's missing a lot of changes.
There's a 2nd edition from 1990 here:
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/Groups/AI/html/cltl/cltl2.html
You can download it from links at the bottom of the page.
> I'm wondering if this is a good book for learning LISP.
It's a reference, not a tutorial. The book Edi mentioned
is a popular tutorial. CLtL2 is a good reference, though.
> Is the content very much in agreement with the ANSI
> LISP standard?
It's not as authoritative as the hyperspec, but it's pretty
close, and you can download it in several formats.
--
Dan
www.prairienet.org/~dsb/
"Zach" <······@gmail.com> writes:
> I would like to begin learning LISP soon. I have the book, "Common
> LISP: The Language" by Guy L. Steele, Jr., printed in 1984 by Digital
> Press (ISBN 0-932376-41-X). I'm wondering if this is a good book for
> learning LISP. Is the content very much in agreement with the ANSI
> LISP standard? And if not how much does it deviate and in which
> topical areas?
That book (often called "CLtL1") is not especially useful. The second
edition (often called "CLtL2"), printed in 1990, ISBN 1-555580-41-6,
is much more useful as a reference and as reading material, but it
still doesn't match the final standard.
I wouldn't recommend using either CLtL1 or CLtL2 to learn the
language; for that, I'd go with Peter Seibel's Practical Common Lisp:
http://gigamonkeys.com/book/
Or Peter Norvig's Paradigms of AI Programming:
http://norvig.com/paip.html
Both offer a lot of introductory value.
After you've learned a bit of Common Lisp, I think it's worthwhile to
read through CLtL2 from cover to cover. The prose is nice, and you'll
get an overview of what's available in the language, and some
perspective on its history.
> I have just downloaded the "Lisp in a Box" so I will be using SBCL
> as my Lisp compiler.
In that case, I'd strongly suggest using Practical Common Lisp.
Zach
From: Edi Weitz
Subject: Re: Common Lisp book still apropos?
Date:
Message-ID: <u4po2okbu.fsf@agharta.de>
On 30 Mar 2007 07:47:59 -0700, "Zach" <······@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would like to begin learning LISP soon. I have the book, "Common
> LISP: The Language" by Guy L. Steele, Jr., printed in 1984 by
> Digital Press (ISBN 0-932376-41-X). I'm wondering if this is a good
> book for learning LISP.
It's a good reference work (but see below) - it's only good for
learning Lisp (we write "Lisp" here, not "LISP") if you're used to
learning from reference books. Some people like that, most don't.
I'd recommend Peter Seibel's book:
http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/
> Is the content very much in agreement with the ANSI LISP standard?
Not completely. This page is helpful:
http://bc.tech.coop/cltl2-ansi.htm
But the final authority is the ANSI standard, of course.
http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Front/index.htm
HTH,
Edi.
--
Lisp is not dead, it just smells funny.
Real email: (replace (subseq ·········@agharta.de" 5) "edi")
On Mar 30, 10:52 am, Edi Weitz <········@agharta.de> wrote:
>
> Lisp is not dead, it just smells funny.
Thanks Edi. That funny quote stirs up another question: just how alive
or dead is Lisp
these days? And what can be done to better promote and foster its
usage?
Zach
On Mar 30, 10:52 am, Edi Weitz <········@agharta.de> wrote:
>
> Lisp is not dead, it just smells funny.
Thanks Edi. That funny quote stirs up another question: just how alive
or dead is Lisp
these days? And what can be done to better promote and foster its
usage?
Zach
From: Edi Weitz
Subject: Re: Common Lisp book still apropos?
Date:
Message-ID: <uzm5un4wn.fsf@agharta.de>
On 30 Mar 2007 08:05:00 -0700, "Zach" <······@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Edi. That funny quote stirs up another question: just how
> alive or dead is Lisp these days?
It pays my rent, that's alive enough for me... :)
> And what can be done to better promote and foster its usage?
Learn it, use it, have fun, spread the word. And, as a general rule,
discussions on comp.lang.lisp never lead anywhere.
--
Lisp is not dead, it just smells funny.
Real email: (replace (subseq ·········@agharta.de" 5) "edi")
On Mar 30, 10:52 am, Edi Weitz <········@agharta.de> wrote:
> On 30 Mar 2007 07:47:59 -0700, "Zach" <······@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I would like to begin learning LISP soon. I have the book, "Common
> > LISP: The Language" by Guy L. Steele, Jr., printed in 1984 by
> > Digital Press (ISBN 0-932376-41-X). I'm wondering if this is a good
> > book for learning LISP.
>
> It's a good reference work (but see below) - it's only good for
> learning Lisp (we write "Lisp" here, not "LISP") if you're used to
> learning from reference books. Some people like that, most don't.
>
> I'd recommend Peter Seibel's book:
>
> http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/
>
> > Is the content very much in agreement with the ANSI LISP standard?
>
> Not completely. This page is helpful:
>
> http://bc.tech.coop/cltl2-ansi.htm
This page covers the Second Edition of CLTL but I have the First
Edition doh :)
So I need to also find something which shows the differences between
the two versions and then compare that diff set to this document.
Zach
"Zach" <······@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mar 30, 10:52 am, Edi Weitz <········@agharta.de> wrote:
> > On 30 Mar 2007 07:47:59 -0700, "Zach" <······@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I would like to begin learning LISP soon. I have the book, "Common
> > > LISP: The Language" by Guy L. Steele, Jr., printed in 1984 by
> > > Digital Press (ISBN 0-932376-41-X). I'm wondering if this is a good
> > > book for learning LISP.
I agree with the others that this isn't a particularly good book for
learning lisp. Although it is easier than the 2nd edition.
> > > Is the content very much in agreement with the ANSI LISP standard?
> >
> > Not completely. This page is helpful:
> >
> > http://bc.tech.coop/cltl2-ansi.htm
>
> This page covers the Second Edition of CLTL but I have the First
> Edition doh :)
> So I need to also find something which shows the differences between
> the two versions and then compare that diff set to this document.
The major difference is that the 2nd edition includes CLOS, the Common
Lisp Object System. In addition there are major new sections dealing
with the Condition System, extended Loop and Pretty Printing. Most of
the other changes are either minor extensions or clarifications and are
generally upwardly compatible with the 1st edition work.
The 2nd edition is a MUCH longer book, weighing in at over 1000 pages.
--
Thomas A. Russ, USC/Information Sciences Institute
From: Edi Weitz
Subject: Re: Common Lisp book still apropos?
Date:
Message-ID: <uvegin4t0.fsf@agharta.de>
On 30 Mar 2007 08:06:18 -0700, "Zach" <······@gmail.com> wrote:
> This page covers the Second Edition of CLTL but I have the First
> Edition doh :)
Sorry, I didn't look closely enough at your original posting. What
Zach Beane said - throw CLtL1 away, read through PCL and PAIP, then
maybe buy and read CLtL2. OK, enough abbreviations for today.
--
Lisp is not dead, it just smells funny.
Real email: (replace (subseq ·········@agharta.de" 5) "edi")
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 17:12:43 +0200, Edi Weitz <········@agharta.de> said:
| ...
| throw CLtL1 away
Not literally, of course---just don't use it as a reference for ANSI
Common Lisp (i.e., Common Lisp as it was eventually standardized).
It is a good book.
---Vassil.
--
The truly good code is the obviously correct code.
On Mar 30, 10:52 am, Edi Weitz <········@agharta.de> wrote:
> On 30 Mar 2007 07:47:59 -0700, "Zach" <······@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I would like to begin learning LISP soon. I have the book, "Common
> > LISP: The Language" by Guy L. Steele, Jr., printed in 1984 by
> > Digital Press (ISBN 0-932376-41-X). I'm wondering if this is a good
> > book for learning LISP.
>
> It's a good reference work (but see below) - it's only good for
> learning Lisp (we write "Lisp" here, not "LISP") if you're used to
> learning from reference books. Some people like that, most don't.
>
> I'd recommend Peter Seibel's book:
>
> http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/
>
> > Is the content very much in agreement with the ANSI LISP standard?
>
> Not completely. This page is helpful:
>
> http://bc.tech.coop/cltl2-ansi.htm
This page covers the Second Edition of CLTL but I have the First
Edition doh :)
So I need to also find something which shows the differences between
the two versions and then compare that diff set to this document.
Zach
In article <························@p15g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>,
"Zach" <······@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would like to begin learning LISP soon. I have the book, "Common
> LISP: The Language" by Guy L. Steele, Jr., printed in 1984 by Digital
> Press (ISBN 0-932376-41-X). I'm wondering if this is a good book for
> learning LISP. Is the content very much in agreement with the ANSI
> LISP standard? And if not how much does it deviate and in which
> topical areas? I have just downloaded the "Lisp in a Box" so I will be
> using SBCL as my Lisp compiler.
>
> Regards,
> Zach
As others said there are better options for learning Lisp.
CLtL1 was the first book describing an at that time emerging
Common Lisp. After some experiences quite a few things
have changed and CLtL2 got published. CLtL2 is
practically CLtL1 plus changes marked in the text.
So with CLtL2 you a slightly confused book, since
you see old and new. Then the ANSI CL standard was
finished - with more changes. Lots of the changes
are documented. Unfortunately the standard text
can only be bought from ANSI and is quite expensive
(http://www.techstreet.com/cgi-bin/detail?product_id=56214
$350).
The Common Lisp HyperSpec is derived from the ANSI CL
standard text and available as HTML:
http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/common-lisp.html.
You can also download a copy there.
What could you do with your copy of CLtL1? There
are two possibilities: keep it as a collectors item
or sell it. Please don't use it as a reference, it only
creates confusion, since the current Common Lisp
implementations try to conform to ANSI CL, which
is quite a bit different. CLtL2 would be a bit
better, but as a reference I would always look
into the ANSI CL standard (via the Hyperspec).
--
http://lispm.dyndns.org