This is my list of recomended reading
"Practical Common Lisp" by Peter Seibel
"Paradingms in AI programming" by Peter Norvig
"Lisp in small pieces" by Christian-Queinnec
"Common Lips object system" by Sonya E. Keene
"The art of metaobject protocol" by Gregor Kiczales
As well as
"ANSI Common Lisp" by Paul Graham
"On Lisp" by Paul Graham
Any one have any additions?
--------------
John Thingstad
John Thingstad wrote:
> This is my list of recomended reading
>
> "Practical Common Lisp" by Peter Seibel
> "Paradingms in AI programming" by Peter Norvig
> "Lisp in small pieces" by Christian-Queinnec
> "Common Lips object system" by Sonya E. Keene
> "The art of metaobject protocol" by Gregor Kiczales
>
> As well as
> "ANSI Common Lisp" by Paul Graham
> "On Lisp" by Paul Graham
>
> Any one have any additions?
>
> --------------
> John Thingstad
Common Lisp HyperSpec
I've found myself turning increasingly to the HyperSpec lately. I'll
expect some behavior of a function or macro only to find that the
expectation was either blatantly incorrect or the behavior is
implementation dependent. When you absolutely, positively, must fully
understand the behavior of lisp, there is no substitute for the HyperSpec.
P� Sat, 05 Apr 2008 05:49:31 +0200, skrev Thomas M. Hermann
<········@centurytel.net>:
> John Thingstad wrote:
>> This is my list of recomended reading
>> "Practical Common Lisp" by Peter Seibel
>> "Paradingms in AI programming" by Peter Norvig
>> "Lisp in small pieces" by Christian-Queinnec
>> "Common Lips object system" by Sonya E. Keene
>> "The art of metaobject protocol" by Gregor Kiczales
>> As well as
>> "ANSI Common Lisp" by Paul Graham
>> "On Lisp" by Paul Graham
>> Any one have any additions?
>> --------------
>> John Thingstad
>
> Common Lisp HyperSpec
>
> I've found myself turning increasingly to the HyperSpec lately. I'll
> expect some behavior of a function or macro only to find that the
> expectation was either blatantly incorrect or the behavior is
> implementation dependent. When you absolutely, positively, must fully
> understand the behavior of lisp, there is no substitute for the
> HyperSpec.
Indeed as well as "Common Lisp the language" by Guy Steele
--------------
John Thingstad
On Apr 4, 9:02 pm, "John Thingstad" <·······@online.no> wrote:
> På Sat, 05 Apr 2008 05:49:31 +0200, skrev Thomas M. Hermann
> <········@centurytel.net>:
>
>
>
> > John Thingstad wrote:
> >> This is my list of recomended reading
> >> "Practical Common Lisp" by Peter Seibel
> >> "Paradingms in AI programming" by Peter Norvig
> >> "Lisp in small pieces" by Christian-Queinnec
> >> "Common Lips object system" by Sonya E. Keene
> >> "The art of metaobject protocol" by Gregor Kiczales
> >> As well as
> >> "ANSI Common Lisp" by Paul Graham
> >> "On Lisp" by Paul Graham
> >> Any one have any additions?
> >> --------------
> >> John Thingstad
>
> > Common Lisp HyperSpec
>
> > I've found myself turning increasingly to the HyperSpec lately. I'll
> > expect some behavior of a function or macro only to find that the
> > expectation was either blatantly incorrect or the behavior is
> > implementation dependent. When you absolutely, positively, must fully
> > understand the behavior of lisp, there is no substitute for the
> > HyperSpec.
>
> Indeed as well as "Common Lisp the language" by Guy Steele
>
> --------------
> John Thingstad
As a beginner, I indulge in the fantasy that everything in the
Hyperspec is either true, or ought to be true. Is that a useful
fantasy, or a dangerous one? How about CLTL?
Neil
Neil Baylis <···········@gmail.com> writes:
> On Apr 4, 9:02�pm, "John Thingstad" <·······@online.no> wrote:
>> P� Sat, 05 Apr 2008 05:49:31 +0200, skrev Thomas M. Hermann �
>> <········@centurytel.net>:
>>
>>
>>
>> > John Thingstad wrote:
>> >> This is my list of recomended reading
>> >> �"Practical Common Lisp" by Peter Seibel
>> >> "Paradingms in AI programming" by Peter Norvig
>> >> "Lisp in small pieces" by Christian-Queinnec
>> >> "Common Lips object system" by Sonya E. Keene
>> >> "The art of metaobject protocol" by Gregor Kiczales
>> >> �As well as
>> >> "ANSI Common Lisp" by Paul Graham
>> >> "On Lisp" by Paul Graham
>> >> �Any one have any additions?
>> >> �--------------
>> >> John Thingstad
>>
>> > Common Lisp HyperSpec
>>
>> > I've found myself turning increasingly to the HyperSpec lately. I'll �
>> > expect some behavior of a function or macro only to find that the �
>> > expectation was either blatantly incorrect or the behavior is �
>> > implementation dependent. When you absolutely, positively, must fully �
>> > understand the behavior of lisp, there is no substitute for the �
>> > HyperSpec.
>>
>> Indeed as well as "Common Lisp the language" by Guy Steele
>>
>> --------------
>> John Thingstad
>
> As a beginner, I indulge in the fantasy that everything in the
> Hyperspec is either true, or ought to be true. Is that a useful
> fantasy, or a dangerous one? How about CLTL?
"Useful Fantasy" is almost a perfect description. It is indeed useful
because all Common Lisp vendors look to the standard (which the
hyperspec represents) for the ultimate authority on what to implement,
or whether their implementation actually conorms. And although the
second word is slightly hyperbolic, it would indeed be a fantasy to
consider any spec perfect, clear, and non-contradictory, and so one
must deal with issues that can't necessarily be drawn from the spec.
Fortunately most of these issues tend to be esoteric, and don't affect
most CL programmers. You can see some of these issues here:
http://www.cliki.net/Proposed%20ANSI%20Revisions%20and%20Clarifications
--
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
P� Sat, 05 Apr 2008 09:00:22 +0200, skrev Neil Baylis
<···········@gmail.com>:
>
> As a beginner, I indulge in the fantasy that everything in the
> Hyperspec is either true, or ought to be true. Is that a useful
> fantasy, or a dangerous one? How about CLTL?
>
> Neil
Mostly the hyper-spec is the ultimate authority.
Of course actual implementations contain errors.
And Note that it is only the Common part of Common Lisp so check the
implementation documentation as well.
Some implementations extend the commands.
As for CLTL2 it predates the ANSI standard so it isn't always correct.
CLTL2 is often better at describing the rational of why a function looks
the way it does though.
--------------
John Thingstad
Neil Baylis wrote:
> As a beginner, I indulge in the fantasy that everything in the
> Hyperspec is either true, or ought to be true. Is that a useful
> fantasy, or a dangerous one? How about CLTL?
CLTL (the first edition) is nowadays of only historical interest.
CLTL2 is still useful, though it was written before the standard was
finished, so there are some things missing, and some that didn't end in
the final standard.
--
On Apr 5, 5:22 am, "John Thingstad" <·······@online.no> wrote:
> This is my list of recomended reading
>
> "Practical Common Lisp" by Peter Seibel
> "Paradingms in AI programming" by Peter Norvig
> "Lisp in small pieces" by Christian-Queinnec
> "Common Lips object system" by Sonya E. Keene
> "The art of metaobject protocol" by Gregor Kiczales
>
> As well as
> "ANSI Common Lisp" by Paul Graham
> "On Lisp" by Paul Graham
>
> Any one have any additions?
>
> --------------
> John Thingstad
"Object-Oriented Common LISP", by Stephen Slade
"The Elements of Artificial Intelligence Using Common Lisp", Steven
Tanimoto
I would make a point of not including "Lisp" by Patrick Winston, as it
is too basic.
············@hotmail.com writes:
> "Object-Oriented Common LISP", by Stephen Slade
I've had this book actively disrecommended to me, so I've never read
it. I enjoyed Keene's CLOS book, though.
> I would make a point of not including "Lisp" by Patrick Winston, as it
> is too basic.
I don't agree. The third edition covers CLOS and has some interesting
projects.
Zach
On 5 Apr, 11:55, Zach Beane <····@xach.com> wrote:
> ············@hotmail.com writes:
>
> > I would make a point of not including "Lisp" by Patrick Winston, as it
> > is too basic.
>
> I don't agree. The third edition covers CLOS and has some interesting
> projects.
"Lisp , 3rd edition" by Winston and Horn is most
definitely not basic. Strangely it leaves out a
lot of basic stuff about CL like adjustable arrays
for example.
On 5 Apr, 04:22, "John Thingstad" <·······@online.no> wrote:
> This is my list of recomended reading
With regards to what , Common Lisp ?
>
> "Practical Common Lisp" by Peter Seibel
> "Paradingms in AI programming" by Peter Norvig
> "Lisp in small pieces" by Christian-Queinnec
> "Common Lips object system" by Sonya E. Keene
> "The art of metaobject protocol" by Gregor Kiczales
>
> As well as
> "ANSI Common Lisp" by Paul Graham
> "On Lisp" by Paul Graham
"ANSI Common Lisp" is introductory right ?
Since "Practical Common Lisp" is also introductory
what would one find in one that they would
not find in the other ?
Spiros Bousbouras <······@gmail.com> writes:
> "ANSI Common Lisp" is introductory right ?
> Since "Practical Common Lisp" is also introductory
> what would one find in one that they would
> not find in the other ?
ANSI CL gives an introduction to the whole of CL, and doesn't absolutely
require any previous programming experience (though it certainly helps
if you've got some). It's relatively heavy on cons cells and functional
techniques, and it has a complete reference of all CL operators.
Practical CL just assumes you're a relatively experienced programmer in
some other language(s) like Java, C++, Ruby or Perl and it takes you on
a tour of all the interesting stuff in CL, paying special attention to
CLOS, conditions and IO. It's not nearly exhaustive, but it does give
you enough knowledge that you can start writing useful lisp programs.
I've got both, and I really like them, but if I had to choose only one,
I'd pick ANSI CL, just because it's more complete (even though it really
doesn't handle CLOS, IO and conditions as extensively as Practical CL).
--
Joost Diepenmaat | blog: http://joost.zeekat.nl/ | work: http://zeekat.nl/
P� Sat, 05 Apr 2008 15:37:46 +0200, skrev Spiros Bousbouras
<······@gmail.com>:
> On 5 Apr, 04:22, "John Thingstad" <·······@online.no> wrote:
>> This is my list of recomended reading
>
> With regards to what , Common Lisp ?
>
>>
>> "Practical Common Lisp" by Peter Seibel
>> "Paradingms in AI programming" by Peter Norvig
>> "Lisp in small pieces" by Christian-Queinnec
>> "Common Lips object system" by Sonya E. Keene
>> "The art of metaobject protocol" by Gregor Kiczales
>>
>> As well as
>> "ANSI Common Lisp" by Paul Graham
>> "On Lisp" by Paul Graham
>
> "ANSI Common Lisp" is introductory right ?
> Since "Practical Common Lisp" is also introductory
> what would one find in one that they would
> not find in the other ?
I was in doubt about that one. Basically Paul Graham has a more fuctional
style.
So I figure it offers two views of how to program Lisp. One complements
the other.
(Personally I am not a great fan of Grahams style, but I feel that is more
a matter of taste.)
--------------
John Thingstad
John Thingstad пишет:
> This is my list of recomended reading
>
> "Practical Common Lisp" by Peter Seibel
> "Paradingms in AI programming" by Peter Norvig
> "Lisp in small pieces" by Christian-Queinnec
> "Common Lips object system" by Sonya E. Keene
> "The art of metaobject protocol" by Gregor Kiczales
>
> As well as
> "ANSI Common Lisp" by Paul Graham
> "On Lisp" by Paul Graham
>
> Any one have any additions?
>
> --------------
> John Thingstad
And what about "Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs"?
--
If you want to get to the top, you have to start at the bottom
On Apr 6, 4:21 pm, Ivan Levashew <········@bluebottle.com> wrote:
>
> And what about "Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs"?
>
> --
> If you want to get to the top, you have to start at the bottom
While an excellent book on computer science, that book is not about
Common Lisp.