tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26357051.post114574376817752168..comments2023-03-23T08:22:49.225-04:00Comments on Foyled: Yegging Me Onairfoylehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09522942023186875478noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26357051.post-1148134927746535372006-05-20T10:22:00.000-04:002006-05-20T10:22:00.000-04:00> So what opportunities does the lisp standard ha...> So what opportunities does the lisp<BR/> standard have for growth?<BR/><BR/>It's a good question, although there's a<BR/>difference between the <I>standard</I><BR/>and the language itself. As you point<BR/>out, the community has lost its taste<BR/>for the work involved in<BR/>standardization, presumably because the<BR/>gain didn't seem worth it. However,<BR/>appointing a dictator is not an<BR/>alternative, because the language is so<BR/>extensible.<BR/><BR/>I am not worried about Lisp's future<BR/>prospects. The language hit bottom<BR/>around 15 years ago when the combination<BR/>of AI Winter and the sneers of C<BR/>programmers about efficiency made it<BR/>look like a dead end. It was kept alive<BR/>by its beauty. Someone once said that<BR/>if we find life on other worlds, and<BR/>they play board games, then one of those<BR/>games will be Go. The rules are so<BR/>simple they are bound to be discovered<BR/>by any intelligent life form. The same<BR/>thing can be said about Lisp (well,<BR/>Scheme anyway).<BR/><BR/>Lisp is looking healthier because<BR/>performance is not the 600-pound gorilla<BR/>it once was, and because no one couples<BR/>it with AI so tightly any more. The<BR/>question is how it's going to<BR/>standardize on libraries and GUIs. I<BR/>know it's taking a while, but I think we<BR/>are converging on some de-facto<BR/>standards in these areas. What we need<BR/>is a really good book, something like<BR/>the LaTeX Companion.airfoylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09522942023186875478noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26357051.post-1146946238016585272006-05-06T16:10:00.000-04:002006-05-06T16:10:00.000-04:00Not just Linux though there are a huge number of d...Not just Linux though there are a huge number of distros there. Unix can mean Solaris, Tru64 (DECOS, OSF/1, whatever they're calling it these days), Ultrix, Unicos, AIX, BSD (Net? Open? Free? BSDi?).<BR/><BR/>I've always believed in applying the right tools for the job at hand. I don't use LISP personally, but most of the applications I'm involved with focus on data transmission, not machine learning. That doesn't make the language useless.<BR/><BR/>His list was bordering on silly. I could apply the same logic he did to anything...toasters, cars, polymers, numbers, elements...the list goes on.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26357051.post-1146937182156639232006-05-06T13:39:00.000-04:002006-05-06T13:39:00.000-04:00For that matter, all those comments about not know...For that matter, all those comments about not knowing which Lisp to use carry over to most "serious" programming languages. Ever investigated which ML to use?<BR/><BR/>It's obvious which Unix to use? I assume you're alluding to Linux, but the question "Which Linux?" has many equally wonderful answers.airfoylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09522942023186875478noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26357051.post-1146892956261706202006-05-06T01:22:00.000-04:002006-05-06T01:22:00.000-04:00You know I think that everything that Yegge said c...You know I think that everything that Yegge said can also be said about Unix:<BR/><BR/>1: Which Unix? Ok, that's obvious.<BR/><BR/>2: Worthless Spec: POSIX. Maybe not quite AS obvious, but every Unix I've ever worked with has both POSIX system calls and native ones. Seems that most people use the native (and often more efficient) ones.<BR/><BR/>3: CLOS: Well, this one doesn't carry over perfectly, but there are similarities from bolting on a object system to bolting on a new filesystems, binary compatibility models as so forth. Yes, it makes it bigger. So? Adding new posts to a blog makes it bigger too...<BR/><BR/>4: Macros: Yes, I hate complex bash scripts (Unix macros for sure) as well. "They're notoriously hard to debug, and honestly it needn't be thay way." Maybe he should get to work on a better debugger.<BR/><BR/>4: Type system: Yes, you can make sure that you don't put 2 files of the same name into the same directory, but you can't be sure that a file with a .txt doesn't really contain binary data that will mess up your terminal. It should be more extensible and skinnable. I'm arguing that it should be bigger, regardless about what I said about bigger equating to bad above.<BR/><BR/>Conclusion:<BR/>There is no acceptable Unix.<BR/><BR/>We shouldn't use Unix. For all it's stability, security and robustness, it has some problems -- especially in scenarios for which it wasn't designed. File and print sharing suck. We should never use this tool again.<BR/><BR/>And the community may someday shrink too. If everyone else has problems that this OS doesn't fit, nether should you.<BR/><BR/>In fact, while you're at it, don't use any screwdrives either. Because hey, I have trouble using them to push in nails.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26357051.post-1146716782343038702006-05-04T00:26:00.000-04:002006-05-04T00:26:00.000-04:00Several people in the Lisp camp are very good at v...Several people in the Lisp camp are very good at verbal/written defense. Defense is necessary, but offense is what blows people's doors off. If you want to get these guys to shut up, you have to sink a 3-pointer in their face. The few guys that made the Lisp movies understand this. It would be cool for the aces that get it to create 3-pointer movies that SHOW people the power of Lisp, or do things like "Try Ruby", or Ruby on Rails.<BR/><BR/>I just went away from this post and watched one of the movies. It's incredible how powerful the movies can be. Lisp is so different that people starting out in it are so easily lost, confused and frustrated--I think the oldtimers forget this sometimes. I remember watching this movie for the first time a half a year ago (I've started learning Scheme since then). At that time, most of it went completely over my head. But watching it now, I just picked up a couple of things and realized a few more. More of this!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26357051.post-1146326110467860252006-04-29T11:55:00.000-04:002006-04-29T11:55:00.000-04:00I have downloaded Qi, and looked at the documentat...I have downloaded Qi, and looked at the documentation, but I've resisted actually playing with it. I guess the syntax just isn't Lisp-y enough! But that's a lousy reason not to play with it.airfoylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09522942023186875478noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26357051.post-1145789695355413302006-04-23T06:54:00.000-04:002006-04-23T06:54:00.000-04:00They really should make the links automatic.... Qi...They really should make the links automatic....<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.lambdassociates.org/" REL="nofollow"> Qi Homepage </A><BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://programmingkungfuqi.blogspot.com/2006/04/qi-and-magic-prime-type.html" REL="nofollow"><BR/>My unusual prime type.<BR/></A>EntropyFailshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10583617029739151930noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26357051.post-1145789613382288882006-04-23T06:53:00.000-04:002006-04-23T06:53:00.000-04:00Sometimes I think that Yegge says things just to g...Sometimes I think that Yegge says things just to get people riled up. This can be a good thing when intended to constructively point out flaws and impediments of a particular system. This goes doubly for programming languages which tend to suffer from true believer syndrome. That particular facet always amazes me as every complete programming language can mimic every other language with the proper encoding. (Though sometimes it involves “write out string to file and compile it” types of transformations! *laugh*) Since his article got you to make this blog, perhaps the strategy has some merit. *grin*<BR/><BR/>As for your love of Lisp, I definitely feel you there. I’ve checked over Nisp but I haven’t had a chance to really program in it. I hope to correct that at some point in the future. In the meantime, have you had a chance to check out Qi from lambda associates? It is a wrapper on top of Lisp that provides pattern matching, currying, guards, and optional strong typing. Given that you enjoy strong types, you may find some interest in Qi’s type system which is First Order Logic complete. Since that will forever be the maximum of what you can accomplish with types, it seems like a nice fit for someone who loves both Lisp and types.<BR/><BR/>You can find out more about Qi at http://www.lambdassociates.org/<BR/>Or if you want a concrete example of the power of Qi types, check out my blog entry on Prime Types at http://programmingkungfuqi.blogspot.com/2006/04/qi-and-magic-prime-type.html<BR/><BR/>Please feel free to leave some feedback as to what you think. Given your stance on types, I feel very interested in your thoughts on the Qi type system.EntropyFailshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10583617029739151930noreply@blogger.com