Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Recommendations of other types of Lisp

205 views
Skip to first unread message

Matthew Leach

unread,
Dec 20, 2011, 4:30:54 PM12/20/11
to
Hi there,

I have begun to learn lisp by using Emacs and I would like to look at
branching out a little further and begin writing programs in other types
of lisp.

I am looking for a general-purpose lisp language (I am a C++ programmer
by trade). I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions?

Many Thanks,
Matt

Pascal J. Bourguignon

unread,
Dec 20, 2011, 7:52:07 PM12/20/11
to
There really are only two lisp families, beyond emacs lisp:

- Common Lisp,
- Scheme.

Both are worth knowing, since a lot of pedagogical material is available
using scheme, but the industrial-strength programming language is Common
Lisp.

Common Lisp will be easier to learn after emacs lisp, since it's a
lisp-2 like emacs lisp (they share an ancestor). But scheme, which is
a lisp-1, is simplier to learn (not necessarily to use).


http://cliki.net/
http://cliki.net/Online+Tutorial


http://schemers.org/


--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.

Krzysztof Drewniak

unread,
Dec 20, 2011, 8:17:38 PM12/20/11
to
Common Lisp is a general-purpose lisp. Try
http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/ to get you started, and Quicklisp (
http://www.quicklisp.org/beta/ ) to get libraries. SBCL (if on *nix) and
Clisp (if not) are the best implementations I know about,

Hope this helps,

Krzysztof Drewniak
--
X-Real-Email-With-Antispam: krzysdrewniak at gmail dot com
pgp key on keyserver.ubuntu.com 2388E924

Captain Obvious

unread,
Dec 21, 2011, 11:49:59 AM12/21/11
to
ML> I have begun to learn lisp by using Emacs and I would like to look at
ML> branching out a little further and begin writing programs in other
ML> types of lisp.

ML> I am looking for a general-purpose lisp language (I am a C++ programmer
ML> by trade). I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions?

Practical Common Lisp
http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/

zermelo

unread,
Dec 21, 2011, 12:35:59 PM12/21/11
to
If you are an absolute beginner in Lisp, “COMMON LISP: A Gentle
Introduction to Symbolic Computation” (http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/
LispBook/) is perhaps the best introduction. And on Win, Allegro CL
(which is free for non-commercial use) is a nice graphical
environment, and above all is easy to install.

Xah Lee

unread,
Dec 22, 2011, 11:31:26 AM12/22/11
to
I would recommend:

* Clojure
* NewLisp

the first runs on Java machine and is widely popular, more widely used
in industry than your typical Common Lisp or Scheme Lisp.

the NewLisp is scripting oriented, like python, perl, ruby, etc. Small
and simple. Very good for exploration and fun and graphics.

Xah

agu monkey

unread,
Dec 22, 2011, 3:15:18 PM12/22/11
to
Save this for when you're at home with LISPs and feel curious about
original systems:

picolisp
http://software-lab.de/doc/tut.html
http://picolisp.com/5000/!wiki?Home

Robert Klemme

unread,
Dec 22, 2011, 4:41:09 PM12/22/11
to
On 22.12.2011 17:31, Xah Lee wrote:
> I would recommend:
>
> * Clojure
> * NewLisp
>
> the first runs on Java machine and is widely popular, more widely used
> in industry than your typical Common Lisp or Scheme Lisp.

Where did you find out the numbers? Just from gut feeling I would have
said that Common Lisp would be more widespread than Clojure since it's
older. I did hear a lot about Clojure recently but whether that
translates to usage I can't tell.

Cheers

robert

--
remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end
http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/

Xah Lee

unread,
Dec 23, 2011, 12:45:44 AM12/23/11
to
On Dec 22, 1:41 pm, Robert Klemme <shortcut...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 22.12.2011 17:31, Xah Lee wrote:
>
> > I would recommend:
>
> > * Clojure
> > * NewLisp
>
> > the first runs on Java machine and is widely popular, more widely used
> > in industry than your typical Common Lisp or Scheme Lisp.
>
> Where did you find out the numbers?  Just from gut feeling I would have
> said that Common Lisp would be more widespread than Clojure since it's
> older.  I did hear a lot about Clojure recently but whether that
> translates to usage I can't tell.

I heard it from the Clojure Propaganda Machine. My dog ate the proof.

Xah

Pascal Costanza

unread,
Dec 23, 2011, 6:33:35 AM12/23/11
to
Common Lisp and Scheme.


Pascal


--
My website: http://p-cos.net
Common Lisp Document Repository: http://cdr.eurolisp.org
Closer to MOP & ContextL: http://common-lisp.net/project/closer/
The views expressed are my own, and not those of my employer.

Yash Tulsyan

unread,
Jan 13, 2012, 12:39:04 AM1/13/12
to
Xah Lee <xah...@gmail.com> writes:

> On Dec 20, 1:30 pm, Matthew Leach <matt...@mattleach.net> wrote:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> I have begun to learn lisp by using Emacs and I would like to look at
>> branching out a little further and begin writing programs in other types
>> of lisp.
>>
>> I am looking for a general-purpose lisp language (I am a C++ programmer
>> by trade). I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions?
>>
>> Many Thanks,
>> Matt
>
> I would recommend:
>
> * Clojure
[...]
> the first runs on Java machine and is widely popular, more widely used
> in industry than your typical Common Lisp or Scheme Lisp.
Aside from any industry usage (he seems to be asking merely for general
purpose Lisps, and I don't think any dialect is widely used in the
industry), I would not recommend Clojure, due to the fact that it is
*gratuitously* incompatible with Common Lisp, which is a Bad Thing.


--Yasht

WJ

unread,
Mar 6, 2012, 12:51:56 PM3/6/12
to
Says the True Believer.

Tim Bradshaw

unread,
Mar 6, 2012, 12:59:49 PM3/6/12
to
On 2012-03-06 17:51:56 +0000, WJ said:

> Says the True Believer.

Poor WJ, I do feel sorry for you. At least Xah is refreshingly mad.

Marco Antoniotti

unread,
Mar 6, 2012, 1:59:58 PM3/6/12
to
I agree. I would't even say that Xah is mad. "Interestingly", I find him "interesting" to read. WJ is just boring.

--
MA

namekuseijin

unread,
Mar 6, 2012, 3:15:32 PM3/6/12
to
try Racket:

http://racket-lang.org/

It's a modern and full-fledged open-source Scheme implementation. Among other niceties, it comes with it's own IDE (DrRacket) wonderfully suited to edit lisp code, it's own web-server, GUI toolkit, debugger, code-profiler and compiler. It's a "batteries included" Scheme, really.

XeCycle

unread,
Mar 7, 2012, 2:37:49 AM3/7/12
to
Matthew Leach <mat...@mattleach.net> writes:

> Hi there,

Hello,
Common Lisp is simply excellent. A popular implementation is
SBCL, runs mainly on Unix-like systems, with experimental support
for windows. There are also commercial implementations for
Windows, e.g. LispWorks.

If you need to run it on JVM, you can try Clojure. ABCL is the
CL on JVM, but I'm afraid it's not a complete one yet, in some
cases (rare, however) you may miss some features. Clojure is
quite different from Common Lisp, and I don't like that.

--
Carl Lei (XeCycle)
Department of Physics, Shanghai Jiao Tong University
OpenPGP public key: 7795E591
Fingerprint: 1FB6 7F1F D45D F681 C845 27F7 8D71 8EC4 7795 E591

daniel....@excite.com

unread,
Mar 9, 2012, 11:14:40 AM3/9/12
to
PLT Racket is a great Scheme workbench - years of libraries and language extensions in there - if you want to have some native GUI on your programs, if you want to have web server or client functionality in your programs, if you want to delve into lots of language extensions... basically if you want to have large exploration possiblities in a pre-integrated IDE.

Any yet Racket respects the basic Scheme standards... I use the GUI libraries - they are the easiest (free cost & software freedom) Lisp GUI libs I've tried - but beyond that I stick close to basic Scheme in my Racket environment programs.

0 new messages