From: Daniel Klein
Subject: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <psmrh3plpaq7ee4kvp6vdjrdrrmupb7mk8@4ax.com>
What do the prompts

[1]>
[2]>
[3]>
etc...

mean? Where is this explained?

I'm absolutely new at all of this. Can someone provide a link or
document as to what this is all about please?

Daniel Klein
Cuyahoga Falls, OH

From: Slobodan Blazeski
Subject: Re: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <1193159065.148794.81710@k35g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
Hi Daniel

We're glad to have you here. CLisp is an implementation of common
lisp, and the thing you're asking about it's the listener or REPL
(read eval print loop). You enter expressions , lisp tries to evaluate
and it prints the result of the evalution , and so on.
For example
1> (defun double (x) (* 2 x))
DOUBLE
2>(double 7)
14
3>(+ 3 2)
5
etc etc etc. Clisp console is very bad for development as it doesn't
support at least parens matching for example when you enter complex
expressions.
I suggest you to look at http://www.beta9.be/svc/lisp-movie-2-reddit.mov
to see how experienced lispers develop code http://homepage.mac.com/svc/LispMovies/index.html
to get idea what are we talking about.
As an IDE for  start up try this one http://common-lisp.net/pcl/windows/lispbox-0.7-clisp-2.37.zip
it uses little older version of Clisp or 2.37 but it doesn't matter.
You can look at some resources at this thread ( books,
implementations, libs etc):
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/9d0080bd3be9ddea/9e0ab129d28fb21b?lnk=st&q=shameless+#9e0ab129d28fb21b

I wish you a happy lisping

Slobodan
From: jcipar
Subject: Re: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <1193160237.049815.81280@q3g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
On Oct 23, 1:04 pm, Slobodan Blazeski <·················@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi Daniel
>
> We're glad to have you here. CLisp is an implementation of common
> lisp, and the thing you're asking about it's the listener or REPL
> (read eval print loop). You enter expressions , lisp tries to evaluate
> and it prints the result of the evalution , and so on.
> For example
> 1> (defun double (x) (* 2 x))
> DOUBLE
> 2>(double 7)
> 14
> 3>(+ 3 2)
> 5
> etc etc etc. Clisp console is very bad for development as it doesn't
> support at least parens matching for example when you enter complex
> expressions.
> I suggest you to look athttp://www.beta9.be/svc/lisp-movie-2-reddit.mov
> to see how experienced lispers develop codehttp://homepage.mac.com/svc/LispMovies/index.html
> to get idea what are we talking about.
> As an IDE for  start up try this onehttp://common-lisp.net/pcl/windows/lispbox-0.7-clisp-2.37.zip
> it uses little older version of Clisp or 2.37 but it doesn't matter.
> You can look at some resources at this thread ( books,
> implementations, libs etc):http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/9d...
>
> I wish you a happy lisping
>
> Slobodan

First off, I'd like to say that I'm very much a novice at this; I've
been looking into lisp more as a hobby (I do most of my work in C or
python).  As a novice giving advice, I have to warn you to take
anything I say with a grain of salt.

One thing that I was put off by at first was the idea that emacs+slime
is the *only* way to develop lisp code.  Though I have a working
knowledge of emacs, but it's really not my favorite.  Then I
discovered CUSP (http://bitfauna.com/projects/cusp/index.html), an
eclipse plugin for cl.  It is probably missing some features that
emacs has, but it doesn't require learning a lot of emacs key
bindings, and has the look and feel of a modern IDE.

I have tried cusp on both windows and linux.  One thing to note, it
uses sbcl, not clisp.  It will install this for you if you don't
already have it installed.

It still took me a little while before I was coding "smoothly" in it
(it's not always clear when the current version of you program is
loaded into the lisp session), but I would highly recommend it.  One
trick, when you create a new project, right click on the ".asd" file
that's created and select "load asd".  Do this whenever you doubt that
your code was reloaded in the lisp session.
From: Rob Warnock
Subject: Re: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <ytCdnbUiaIrdiILanZ2dnUVZ_tajnZ2d@speakeasy.net>
jcipar  <······@gmail.com> wrote:
+---------------
| One thing that I was put off by at first was the idea that
| emacs+slime is the *only* way to develop lisp code.
+---------------

It's not. Really, no matter what the fanatics will try to tell you.
It [or some equivalent IDE] *is* the way preferred by most of the
CL community, but there are a few holdouts who still insist on
using some other editor[1] and even a bare REPL[2] for interactive
development, and even find it comfortable and very productive.

+---------------
| Then I discovered CUSP (http://bitfauna.com/projects/cusp/index.html)
...
| It still took me a little while before I was coding "smoothly" in it
| (it's not always clear when the current version of you program is
| loaded into the lisp session), but I would highly recommend it.
+---------------

Fine. Then for you that's "some equivalent IDE". Go with it!

And welcome to the last programming language you will ever
need to learn...  ;-}  ;-}


-Rob

[1] I unapologetically use "Vi" ("nvi-1.79", to be precise).

[2] O.k., so not a totally *bare* REPL. One really needs to define a
    few helper functions for oneself to do things like recompile/reload
    the current set of source files you're editing. E.g., I have one
    called LOAD* that just "does the right thing" when I'm noodling
    around. [For more complicated situations, I have a convenience
    wrapper around ASDF.]

-----
Rob Warnock			<····@rpw3.org>
627 26th Avenue			<URL:http://rpw3.org/>
San Mateo, CA 94403		(650)572-2607
From: Kamen TOMOV
Subject: Re: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <uodeorfv3.fsf@cybuild.com>
On Tue, Oct 23 2007, jcipar wrote:

> ...
> One thing that I was put off by at first was the idea that emacs+slime
> is the *only* way to develop lisp code.  
> ...

For a Lisp IDE you can choose also from: 

- Allegro CL 8.1 Free
- LispWorks Personal Edition

Both of them are free for learning purposes.

-- 
�����
From: ···············@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <1193229092.591454.264690@v29g2000prd.googlegroups.com>
On 24 Oct, 11:01, Kamen TOMOV <·····@cybuild.com> wrote:

> For a Lisp IDE you can choose also from:
>
> - Allegro CL 8.1 Free
> - LispWorks Personal Edition

Or ABLE (http://phil.nullable.eu/)...

--
Phil
http://phil.nullable.eu/
From: Raymond Toy (RT/EUS)
Subject: Re: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <sxdve8wika9.fsf@rtp.ericsson.se>
>>>>> "Slobodan" == Slobodan Blazeski <·················@gmail.com> writes:

    Slobodan> etc etc etc. Clisp console is very bad for development as it doesn't
    Slobodan> support at least parens matching for example when you enter complex
    Slobodan> expressions.

Can't say for the recent versions, but it used to support parens
matching and tab completion.  I have been unable to build clisp with
readline support, so I don't have these features anymore.

Ray
From: Daniel Klein
Subject: Re: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <8tuuh39liku1469s7r82jad9i85jagruqt@4ax.com>
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:04:25 -0700, Slobodan Blazeski
<·················@gmail.com> wrote:

>Hi Daniel
>
>We're glad to have you here. 

Slobodan.

Thanks for that complete and informative reply. I will certainly look
into what you have suggested.

While I have been tasked to create an EMACS mode for the language I am
using, I am also doing some self-study. I picked up a copy of SICP but
noticed right away that, while the text mentions LISP, it uses SCHEME
for all of the code. So I see differences like 'defun' vs 'define'.

Is there someplace that gives the syntactic differences between LISP
and SCHEME so that I don't stumber over them like I did with 'define'?

Daniel Klein
From: Slobodan Blazeski
Subject: Re: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <1193249798.479545.5170@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
On Oct 24, 7:13 pm, Daniel Klein <·······@featherbrain.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:04:25 -0700, Slobodan Blazeski
>
> <·················@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Hi Daniel
>
> >We're glad to have you here.
>
> Slobodan.
>
> Thanks for that complete and informative reply. I will certainly look
> into what you have suggested.
>
> While I have been tasked to create an EMACS mode for the language I am
> using, I am also doing some self-study. I picked up a copy of SICP but
> noticed right away that, while the text mentions LISP, it uses SCHEME
> for all of the code. So I see differences like 'defun' vs 'define'.
>
> Is there someplace that gives the syntactic differences between LISP
> and SCHEME so that I don't stumber over them like I did with 'define'?
>
> Daniel Klein

Daniel
SICP is very good book and I enjoyed watching SICP videos
http://www.swiss.ai.mit.edu/classes/6.001/abelson-sussman-lectures/
but you have to decide which language you want to learn Common Lisp or
Scheme.
Trying to learn Common Lisp from SICP will probably only confuse you.
So if you decided to learn common lisp pick a book about common lisp
from those that were recommended to you.
After you're fairly fluent in one language you could learn the other
too.
For the explanation of Common Lisp features look at
http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Front/index.htm
here's for example entry about defun
http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/m_defun.htm#defun
.
I'm unable to help you with your Scheme question as I'm not using
Scheme.
Quick google for scheme lisp will give you a lot of info for comparing
them and their syntax.

Slobodan
From: Daniel Klein
Subject: Re: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <7vkvh3pb4qm2d1t6pp088t4djhk3idc39d@4ax.com>
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 18:16:38 -0000, Slobodan Blazeski
<·················@gmail.com> wrote:

>Daniel
>SICP is very good book and I enjoyed watching SICP videos
>http://www.swiss.ai.mit.edu/classes/6.001/abelson-sussman-lectures/
>but you have to decide which language you want to learn Common Lisp or
>Scheme.
>Trying to learn Common Lisp from SICP will probably only confuse you.
>So if you decided to learn common lisp pick a book about common lisp
>from those that were recommended to you.
>After you're fairly fluent in one language you could learn the other
>too.
>For the explanation of Common Lisp features look at
>http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Front/index.htm
>here's for example entry about defun
>http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/m_defun.htm#defun

Good advice. I will stick with Lisp. I've just ordered 'Practical
Common Lisp' from Amazon to get me on my way :-)

Daniel Klein
From: Slobodan Blazeski
Subject: Re: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <1193334848.840797.22470@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>
On Oct 25, 1:27 am, Daniel Klein <·······@featherbrain.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 18:16:38 -0000, Slobodan Blazeski
>
> <·················@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Daniel
> >SICP is very good book and I enjoyed watching SICP videos
> >http://www.swiss.ai.mit.edu/classes/6.001/abelson-sussman-lectures/
> >but you have to decide which language you want to learn Common Lisp or
> >Scheme.
> >Trying to learn Common Lisp from SICP will probably only confuse you.
> >So if you decided to learn common lisp pick a book about common lisp
> >from those that were recommended to you.
> >After you're fairly fluent in one language you could learn the other
> >too.
> >For the explanation of Common Lisp features look at
> >http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Front/index.htm
> >here's for example entry about defun
> >http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/m_defun.htm#defun
>
> Good advice. I will stick with Lisp. I've just ordered 'Practical
> Common Lisp' from Amazon to get me on my way :-)
>
> Daniel Klein

Great choice.

cheers and happy lisping
Slobodan
From: Kamen TOMOV
Subject: Re: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <uk5pcnz3d.fsf@cybuild.com>
On Wed, Oct 24 2007, Daniel Klein wrote:

> ...
> Is there someplace that gives the syntactic differences between LISP
> and SCHEME so that I don't stumber over them like I did with 'define'?

I couldn't find the one I was looking for but the following is a start:

http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/novak/schemevscl.html


-- 
�����
From: Rob Warnock
Subject: Re: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <C-GdnVXZ5ewJ0L3anZ2dnUVZ_h-vnZ2d@speakeasy.net>
Kamen TOMOV  <·····@cybuild.com> wrote:
+---------------
| Daniel Klein wrote:
| > Is there someplace that gives the syntactic differences between LISP
| > and SCHEME so that I don't stumber over them like I did with 'define'?
| 
| I couldn't find the one I was looking for but the following is a start:
| http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/novak/schemevscl.html
+---------------

That one addresses only a few surface syntax differences, but
doesn't touch the more serious issues, e.g., Lisp1 vs. Lisp2
[LispN, really], "proper" tail-call optimization, CALL/CC or not,
lexical vs. [both lexical and] dynamic scope, SYNTAX-RULES vs.
DEFMACRO [and <http://community.schemewiki.org/?hygiene-versus-gensym>],
DYNAMIC-WIND vs. UNWIND-PROTECT (not to mention the entire CL
exception system!), modules vs. packages, etc.  More of those
issues are covered in these:

    http://community.schemewiki.org/?scheme-vs-common-lisp
    http://www.accesscom.com/~darius/writings/scheme-for-lispers.html
    http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?LispSchemeDifferences
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Lisp#Comparison_with_other_Lisps

and of course the Lisp1 vs. LispN classic is here:

    http://www.nhplace.com/kent/Papers/Technical-Issues.html


-Rob

-----
Rob Warnock			<····@rpw3.org>
627 26th Avenue			<URL:http://rpw3.org/>
San Mateo, CA 94403		(650)572-2607
From: Daniel Klein
Subject: Re: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <bv2vh3hvm4v4a57njptci5i63lt1uc9pna@4ax.com>
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:04:25 -0700, Slobodan Blazeski
<·················@gmail.com> wrote:

>I suggest you to look at http://www.beta9.be/svc/lisp-movie-2-reddit.mov
>to see how experienced lispers develop code http://homepage.mac.com/svc/LispMovies/index.html
>to get idea what are we talking about.
>As an IDE for  start up try this one http://common-lisp.net/pcl/windows/lispbox-0.7-clisp-2.37.zip

What about SLIME? Is that considered a good/viable tool for LISP
development?

I don't want to get into a he-man, chest-thumping contest as to what
tool is the best. I just want to get started with something free and
easy. EMACS has quite a learning curve but I have to learn this
anyway.

Daniel Klein
From: Slobodan Blazeski
Subject: Re: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <1193334732.674222.14790@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>
On Oct 24, 8:18 pm, Daniel Klein <·······@featherbrain.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:04:25 -0700, Slobodan Blazeski
>
> <·················@gmail.com> wrote:
> >I suggest you to look athttp://www.beta9.be/svc/lisp-movie-2-reddit.mov
> >to see how experienced lispers develop codehttp://homepage.mac.com/svc/LispMovies/index.html
> >to get idea what are we talking about.
> >As an IDE for  start up try thisone http://common-lisp.net/pcl/windows/lispbox-0.7-clisp-2.37.zip
>
> What about SLIME? Is that considered a good/viable tool for LISP
> development?
>
> I don't want to get into a he-man, chest-thumping contest as to what
> tool is the best. I just want to get started with something free and
> easy. EMACS has quite a learning curve but I have to learn this
> anyway.
>
> Daniel Klein
Lispbox has SLIME integrated , you can read more at http://www.gigamonkeys.com/lispbox/
SLIME is considered good tool good tool lisping (unless you ask Kenny
of course).
Don't worry to much about which implementation to choose, as
everything suggested in this thread is great for start. After a while
you'll be able to choose easily what's best for you.

Slobodan
From: John Thingstad
Subject: Re: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <op.t0nimncapqzri1@pandora.upc.no>
P� Tue, 23 Oct 2007 14:47:53 +0200, skrev Daniel Klein  
<·······@featherbrain.net>:

> What do the prompts
>
> [1]>
> [2]>
> [3]>
> etc...
>
> mean? Where is this explained?
>
> I'm absolutely new at all of this. Can someone provide a link or
> document as to what this is all about please?
>
> Daniel Klein
> Cuyahoga Falls, OH


lol.
That is the command prompt. You enter Lisp commands there.
try

(+ 1 2)
(bye)

For writing real work you probaly want EMACS and SLIME.
From: Daniel Klein
Subject: Re: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <u0urh39i2gvs90s0m49gebs96lod7m7qfr@4ax.com>
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 15:05:01 +0200, "John Thingstad"
<··············@chello.no> wrote:

>P� Tue, 23 Oct 2007 14:47:53 +0200, skrev Daniel Klein  
><·······@featherbrain.net>:
>
>> What do the prompts
>>
>> [1]>
>> [2]>
>> [3]>
>> etc...
>>
>> mean? Where is this explained?
>>
>> I'm absolutely new at all of this. Can someone provide a link or
>> document as to what this is all about please?
>>
>> Daniel Klein
>> Cuyahoga Falls, OH
>
>
>lol.
>That is the command prompt. You enter Lisp commands there.
>try
>
>(+ 1 2)
>(bye)
>
>For writing real work you probaly want EMACS and SLIME.


I already understand that they are the 'command prompt'. Why does the
number increment?

Yes, I have been looking into EMACS.

Thanks,
Daniel Klein
From: Alex Mizrahi
Subject: Re: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <471dfe13$0$90266$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
 DK> I already understand that they are the 'command prompt'. Why does the
 DK> number increment?

you can cut&paste your lisp session, or print it out.
this numbers will tell us how hard were you trying to solve problem yourself 
before posting to newsgroup.
also, we'll be able to notice if you are cheating -- there would be blanks 
in number sequence if you delete some commands you don't want others to see.

also, they say you can attach some big session listing to your message, and 
than refer to these numbers in it -- i.e. "i've defined function in command 
[13], but it refuses to work when i call it in [157]". 
From: Daniel Klein
Subject: Re: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <th0sh39fnr2qirj4o0arhacft5hk32k0nb@4ax.com>
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 16:58:38 +0300, "Alex Mizrahi"
<········@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:

> DK> I already understand that they are the 'command prompt'. Why does the
> DK> number increment?
>
>you can cut&paste your lisp session, or print it out.
>this numbers will tell us how hard were you trying to solve problem yourself 
>before posting to newsgroup.
>also, we'll be able to notice if you are cheating -- there would be blanks 
>in number sequence if you delete some commands you don't want others to see.
>
>also, they say you can attach some big session listing to your message, and 
>than refer to these numbers in it -- i.e. "i've defined function in command 
>[13], but it refuses to work when i call it in [157]". 
>

Ahhh, so it's just a simple line counter. I had thought it represented
some sort of 'stack' that I had to return from.

Thanks for the feedback.

Dan
From: Rainer Joswig
Subject: Re: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <joswig-9DF7FA.18005623102007@news-europe.giganews.com>
In article <··································@4ax.com>,
 Daniel Klein <·······@featherbrain.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 16:58:38 +0300, "Alex Mizrahi"
> <········@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> 
> > DK> I already understand that they are the 'command prompt'. Why does the
> > DK> number increment?
> >
> >you can cut&paste your lisp session, or print it out.
> >this numbers will tell us how hard were you trying to solve problem yourself 
> >before posting to newsgroup.
> >also, we'll be able to notice if you are cheating -- there would be blanks 
> >in number sequence if you delete some commands you don't want others to see.
> >
> >also, they say you can attach some big session listing to your message, and 
> >than refer to these numbers in it -- i.e. "i've defined function in command 
> >[13], but it refuses to work when i call it in [157]". 
> >
> 
> Ahhh, so it's just a simple line counter.

Lisp is not line-oriented. Input can span many lines.
It counts each input form.

In some Lisp implementations you can also refer
to the elements of the input history by number.

> I had thought it represented
> some sort of 'stack' that I had to return from.
> 
> Thanks for the feedback.
> 
> Dan
From: Thomas A. Russ
Subject: Re: Working with clisp 2.42 on Windows
Date: 
Message-ID: <ymiodelacin.fsf@blackcat.isi.edu>
Daniel Klein <·······@featherbrain.net> writes:

> On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 16:58:38 +0300, "Alex Mizrahi"
> <········@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> 
> > DK> I already understand that they are the 'command prompt'. Why does the
> > DK> number increment?
> >
> >you can cut&paste your lisp session, or print it out.
> >this numbers will tell us how hard were you trying to solve problem yourself 
> >before posting to newsgroup.
> >also, we'll be able to notice if you are cheating -- there would be blanks 
> >in number sequence if you delete some commands you don't want others to see.
> >
> >also, they say you can attach some big session listing to your message, and 
> >than refer to these numbers in it -- i.e. "i've defined function in command 
> >[13], but it refuses to work when i call it in [157]". 
> >
> 
> Ahhh, so it's just a simple line counter. I had thought it represented
> some sort of 'stack' that I had to return from.

Which is not actually a silly thing to imagine.  Many other lisp systems
use a number in the prompt to indicate the depth in the break stack that
you are located in.  For example, Allegro increments the number for each
nested error that you get:


CL-USER> (/ 30 0)
Error: Attempt to divide 30 by zero.
  [condition type: DIVISION-BY-ZERO]

Restart actions (select using :continue):
 0: Return to Top Level (an "abort" restart).
 1: Abort entirely from this process.
[1] CL-USER> (* 'a 'b)
Error: `A' is not of the expected type `NUMBER'
  [condition type: TYPE-ERROR]

Restart actions (select using :continue):
 0: Return to Debug Level 1 (an "abort" restart).
 1: Return to Top Level (an "abort" restart).
 2: Abort entirely from this process.
[2] CL-USER> 


-- 
Thomas A. Russ,  USC/Information Sciences Institute