Search found 38 matches

by Duke
Mon Feb 13, 2012 12:05 am
Forum: Common Lisp
Topic: Lisp Job on Elance
Replies: 3
Views: 4368

Re: Lisp Job on Elance

Tom wrote:Surely there's a lisper out there that can win this.

https://www.elance.com/j/lisp-website-a ... n/28604330

Tom
I don't see why not. Many of us have a talents.
by Duke
Mon Sep 19, 2011 7:00 pm
Forum: Common Lisp
Topic: recursion and then some
Replies: 2
Views: 3297

Re: recursion and then some

You should probably read On Lisp, or ANSI Common Lisp. They (I'm guessing both of them) go over the function in detail. You could also try grepping the source of your favorite Common Lisp implementation for "defun member" to see a real-life example. But, it's good to figure these things out for your...
by Duke
Tue Aug 30, 2011 10:53 pm
Forum: The Lounge
Topic: What name do you use for the dashed lisp naming convention?
Replies: 9
Views: 13786

Re: What name do you use for the dashed lisp naming convention?

I note that the word "hyphenated" didn't occur in that discussion. ;)

I can't really think of any clever neologisms... maybe "choo-choo-case" because the hyphens make it look like a train. :lol:
by Duke
Mon Aug 29, 2011 11:00 am
Forum: The Lounge
Topic: Any New Insights
Replies: 2
Views: 4851

Re: Any New Insights

Whatever inspires, please feel free to post here. I'm currently procrastinating on implementing a lot of stuff that already exists in SDL. I've already done lines, circles, and polygons, then I moved on to reinventing surface-copy. I want to ultimately create a set of macros (or a DSL as the case m...
by Duke
Sun Aug 21, 2011 8:45 am
Forum: The Lounge
Topic: Any reason for not learning NewLisp as first Lisp?
Replies: 2
Views: 5616

Re: Hello

But for a non-programmer like me, is there any reason I should start learning Common Lisp first, and then come to NewLisp, instead of starting from NewLisp right away? I have to admit that I know nothing at all about NewLisp, but I do know the resources that exist for Common Lisp: The books, On Lis...
by Duke
Fri Aug 19, 2011 6:07 pm
Forum: Common Lisp
Topic: (incf x) slower than (setf x (+ x 1))?
Replies: 5
Views: 3558

Re: (incf x) slower than (setf x (+ x 1))?

I'm testing in GNU CLISP. I havent tried sbcl or others (yet) Without testing I have used incf and decf since I htough it would be a optimization. Today I benchmarked a little and found out incf performes 3 times slower than setf. For me this doesn't make any sense. Why do we have incf/decf if not ...
by Duke
Sun Aug 07, 2011 4:58 am
Forum: Common Lisp
Topic: QL in SBCL
Replies: 9
Views: 10840

Re: QL in SBCL

I also installed QL on Linux without any fiddling, but I've had the sb-bsd-sockets problem before. Not exactly sure how I fixed it, but you'll find sb-bsd-sockets in SBCL's /contrib directory. If updating and reinstalling doesn't work, installing sb-bsd-sockets is a reasonable plan B, I think.
by Duke
Tue Jul 12, 2011 11:16 pm
Forum: Common Lisp
Topic: What does clisp do behind the scene if you give it (* 2 2 2)
Replies: 10
Views: 6123

Re: What does clisp do behind the scene if you give it (* 2 2 2)

gugamilare wrote:
Duke wrote:In SBCL, it actually does take a single extra operation to do (* a (* b c)) as compared to (* a b c).
That is not the case if the code is compiled.
This is off topic, but... when is the code ever not compiled in SBCL? Is there a circumstance where compiled-function-p returns nil?
by Duke
Tue Jul 12, 2011 11:10 pm
Forum: Common Lisp
Topic: is there a way to replace the elements in a list?
Replies: 7
Views: 8679

Re: is there a way to replace the elements in a list?

I don't actually mean destructively replace, I mean lets say you pass the list (a b c d e), I want to return the list (8 8 8 8 8)... so basically I want a list returned with the same number of elements but instead of the original items, it'd be an item of my choosing. I am able to do this using the...
by Duke
Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:19 pm
Forum: Common Lisp
Topic: What does clisp do behind the scene if you give it (* 2 2 2)
Replies: 10
Views: 6123

Re: What does clisp do behind the scene if you give it (* 2 2 2)

If (* 2 2 2) is somehow converted to (* (* 2 2) 2), then that extra step used in the conversion would mean that technically it would take slightly longer for the CPU to compute right? In SBCL, it actually does take a single extra operation to do (* a (* b c)) as compared to (* a b c). I'd assume CL...