|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 19:41:24 -0500
From: "Toby DiPasquale" <toby@cbcg.net>
>> What I learned of formal programming is almost 20 years old. I'm
>> top-down, procedural, and I never really "got" this newfangled Object
>> Oriented stuff, so that's where I'm coming from. I've written a
>> couple of trivial C programs, with the book in my lap; otherwise I'm
>> bash & Perl all the way. So I'd be interested in something like:
>
> Lisp is 50 years old this year; its anything but "new-fangled".
I wasn't clear. From my perspective, OO is newfangled. I know Lisp has
been around forever, that's one of the reasons I think it sounds
interesting enough to try to learn.
[...]
>> * What's the "best" Lisp compiler for Linux (whatever "best" means)
>> and how do we get it (clisp?)
>
> The answer to this question is almost entirely religious. SBCL is
Uh oh...
> generally considered to be the fastest (in generated code) for Common
> Lisp for the free varieties, Clisp is the most portable and Allegro
> has the best commercial and library support but is not free. As for
> Scheme compilers, the consensus is much less overwhelming... since
> Scheme is often used as a teaching tool and in academia, the culture
> around Scheme is much more about experimentation and much less about
> "production-readiness".
I picked clisp out of a hat--err, well an Ubuntu 'aptitude search'
anyway. But now that I know to look I do find both clisp and sbcl in
both Etch and Gutsy repos. Good to know... Oh, there seems to be a
bunch of Scheme stuff in both too, including mzscheme/drscheme.
[...]
--------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 18:04:54 -0800 (PST)
From: Josh Goldstein <oopjosh@yahoo.com>
> I could talk about Scheme (a LISP dialect, almost the exact same
thing > as LISP) that would be similar to the Erlang talk, not that I'm an
> 'expert', or even a 'good public speaker/presenter'.
If you're willing to talk I'd be delighted to listen.
>> * How to "think in Lisp" (like, thinking in Perl requires hashes and
>> Regexp :)
>From what I have seen, it's thinking in recursion and lists.
OK, that rings a bell from other things I've read about Lisp, which I
must admit are mostly Paul Graham's essays. :-)
[...]
> I only know of Scheme and Lisp, and they're pretty much the same as
> far as any non-super-expert would see things.
Maybe I should also ask which to start out with then, Lisp or Scheme?
OTOH, I do a lot with Perl and almost all of what I end up needing
requires lots of pattern matching, very often using PCRE. And I use a
lot of hashes too, that there may be some data structure laziness
happening there. I'm not sure I see that same "fit" in Lisp; but hey,
that's the point of learning something new right?
Anyway, thanks to you both for the answers and the book references, I've
made a note of them.
I know we had at least one other person interested, anyone else
interested in listening or talking?
Thanks,
JP
----------------------------|:::======|-------------------------------
JP Vossen, CISSP |:::======| jp{at}jpsdomain{dot}org
My Account, My Opinions |=========| http://www.jpsdomain.org/
----------------------------|=========|-------------------------------
Microsoft has single-handedly nullified Moore's Law.
Innate design flaws of Windows make a personal firewall, anti-virus
and anti-malware software mandatory. The resulting software arms race
has effectively flattened Moore's Law on hardware running Windows.
___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|