Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
LISP/Scheme for GUI or game development?
184 views
Skip to first unread message
Leff Ivanov
Aug 7, 2015, 8:58:55 AM8/7/15
to
I was asking this on StackOverflow, but apparently it is breaking some of their stupid rules, so maybe someone here could help me out. What options do I have if I want to develop complex GUI application or a game using LISP/Scheme? I know that Racket has a decent GUI toolkit, but is there anything else to try? Here is the list of features I'd like to have:
1) The LISP/Scheme implementation should be able to create standalone executables, so users could run the application as usual, without the need to install any additional frameworks. I'd like it to be compiled to native code, but JIT-compiled implementations that is able to create stanalone executables (like Racket for example) will do.
2) The GUI toolkit or game development kit should be well integrated into the language, so I could be able to develop GUI interfaces using the language paradigms. To make it clear I don't want the one-to-one simple bindings to C based library, where I need to code in imperative only style, manage memory manually, struggle with callback to C and back and etc.
3) I need to be to support Windows, Linux and Mac OSX operating systems, but it is good if the LISP/Scheme implementation would allow me to create Android and iOS applications as well.
Obviously Racket fits good here and if there is no good alternative to it I think I would use Racket. But I'd like to know if I am missing something in the functional programming realm (well I'd like it to be LISP/Scheme based system, but Haskell/OCaml/Prolog based stuff are acceptable too, and please no C/C++ and CLR/JVM stuff).
1) The LISP/Scheme implementation should be able to create standalone executables, so users could run the application as usual, without the need to install any additional frameworks. I'd like it to be compiled to native code, but JIT-compiled implementations that is able to create stanalone executables (like Racket for example) will do.
2) The GUI toolkit or game development kit should be well integrated into the language, so I could be able to develop GUI interfaces using the language paradigms. To make it clear I don't want the one-to-one simple bindings to C based library, where I need to code in imperative only style, manage memory manually, struggle with callback to C and back and etc.
3) I need to be to support Windows, Linux and Mac OSX operating systems, but it is good if the LISP/Scheme implementation would allow me to create Android and iOS applications as well.
Obviously Racket fits good here and if there is no good alternative to it I think I would use Racket. But I'd like to know if I am missing something in the functional programming realm (well I'd like it to be LISP/Scheme based system, but Haskell/OCaml/Prolog based stuff are acceptable too, and please no C/C++ and CLR/JVM stuff).
Helmut Eller
Aug 7, 2015, 11:18:26 AM8/7/15
to
On Fri, Aug 07 2015, Leff Ivanov wrote:
> Obviously Racket fits good here and if there is no good alternative to
> it I think I would use Racket. But I'd like to know if I am missing
> something in the functional programming realm (well I'd like it to be
> LISP/Scheme based system, but Haskell/OCaml/Prolog based stuff are
> acceptable too, and please no C/C++ and CLR/JVM stuff).
Maybe take a look at Lua; it seems to be popular among game developers.
> Obviously Racket fits good here and if there is no good alternative to
> it I think I would use Racket. But I'd like to know if I am missing
> something in the functional programming realm (well I'd like it to be
> LISP/Scheme based system, but Haskell/OCaml/Prolog based stuff are
> acceptable too, and please no C/C++ and CLR/JVM stuff).
I don't think that any of the current Common Lisp implementations fits
your bill. At least, I never heard of a game engine written in/for
Common Lisp.
Helmut
luc...@math.purdue.edu
Aug 7, 2015, 4:30:28 PM8/7/15
to
Gambit Scheme
http://www.gambitscheme.org
has LambdaNative:
https://github.com/part-cw/lambdanative
I don't know if it fits your requirements.
Brad
http://www.gambitscheme.org
has LambdaNative:
https://github.com/part-cw/lambdanative
I don't know if it fits your requirements.
Brad
Petter Gustad
Aug 8, 2015, 10:34:40 AM8/8/15
to
Helmut Eller <eller....@gmail.com> writes:
> your bill. At least, I never heard of a game engine written in/for
> Common Lisp.
http://franz.com/success/customer_apps/animation_graphics/naughtydog.lhtml
> your bill. At least, I never heard of a game engine written in/for
> Common Lisp.
//Petter
--
.sig removed by request.
His Kennyness
Aug 8, 2015, 10:51:43 PM8/8/15
to
Would developing for the Web work, bundled with a web engine?
-kt
His Kennyness
Aug 8, 2015, 11:16:17 PM8/8/15
to
By the way..
On Friday, August 7, 2015 at 8:58:55 AM UTC-4, Leff Ivanov wrote:
The path you have chosen in your ignorance will be an order of magnitude worse.
-hk
On Friday, August 7, 2015 at 8:58:55 AM UTC-4, Leff Ivanov wrote:
> To make it clear I don't want the one-to-one simple bindings to C based library,
> where I need to code in imperative only style, manage memory manually, struggle
> with callback to C and back and etc.
You need to forget what you know (because what you know is false). The Lisp Way involves picking the C/C++ game library of your dreams and making it look like an even better Lisp library with a thin layer of glue code.
> where I need to code in imperative only style, manage memory manually, struggle
> with callback to C and back and etc.
The path you have chosen in your ignorance will be an order of magnitude worse.
-hk
0 new messages