Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
"Micro-Lisp" a lisp for the C64
769 views
Skip to first unread message
wo...@yahoo.com
Apr 11, 2012, 8:33:27 PM4/11/12
to
"Micro-Lisp Version 2.5 -- A Lisp interpreter for the C64!"
_The Transactor_ Volume 8, Issue 06 (May 1988) Page 38
http://csbruce.com/cbm/transactor/v8/i6/
Archive of disk images:
http://csbruce.com/cbm/transactor/disks/
Disk 23 has the files from the issue.
Commodore emulators here:
http://www.viceteam.org/
Instructions
1. Start commodore 64 emulator.
2. Attach disk image "disk23.d64".
3. LOAD"MICRO-LISP",8,1
Note: In Vice, you may have to push unexepected keys to get the expected
symbols. Try setting the keyboard options from "positional" to
"symbolic".
4. Hack. It's very charming. I tried to write a factorial function and
found I had to implement less-than first.
--
William Clifford
William Clifford
Apr 11, 2012, 9:40:11 PM4/11/12
to
wo...@yahoo.com writes:
> 4. Hack. It's very charming. I tried to write a factorial function and
> found I had to implement less-than first.
... but of course there is a function lessp which I overlooked. This is
> 4. Hack. It's very charming. I tried to write a factorial function and
> found I had to implement less-than first.
what I get for not reading the spec!
--
William Clifford
Kaz Kylheku
Apr 11, 2012, 9:50:42 PM4/11/12
to
On 2012-04-12, wo...@yahoo.com <wo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://csbruce.com/cbm/transactor/v8/i6/
Remark: the format and content of this publication was more appropriate
to 1978 than to 1988. :)
> http://csbruce.com/cbm/transactor/v8/i6/
Remark: the format and content of this publication was more appropriate
to 1978 than to 1988. :)
Pascal J. Bourguignon
Apr 12, 2012, 12:04:07 AM4/12/12
to
Lisp. It should be easy and quick:
- only dynamic bindings, no LET, just LAMBDA (plus SET and SETQ).
- seems to be a lisp-2 (both SETQ and DEFINE/DEFUN and GETDEF UNDEF).
- only about 60 operators. (don't implement SYS, or implement it as a
"FFI" to the underlying CL).
Once you've done that, you get bonus point for doing some bit archeology
and finding on the web or on old media, some Micro-Lisp programs to be
run on your implementation.
Have a nice week end!
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.
Marco Antoniotti
Apr 12, 2012, 6:16:38 AM4/12/12
to
Newlisp:
Picolisp:
Matzlisp:
Microlisp:
from you-know-who.
etc etc etc etc etc
Cheers
--
MA
kodifik
Apr 13, 2012, 9:54:13 AM4/13/12
to
MicroLisp:
(factorial 10) -> 3628800 ; correct
(factorial 11) -> 6362368 ; incorrect, caused by system limits
...but WJ would say it's still much better than CL.
(factorial 10) -> 3628800 ; correct
(factorial 11) -> 6362368 ; incorrect, caused by system limits
...but WJ would say it's still much better than CL.
namekuseijin
Apr 13, 2012, 1:13:45 PM4/13/12
to
0 new messages