this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

Lisp

52 readers
3 users here now

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Personaly i found abcl a bad experience.
Thoughts on ecl & clisp ?

sbcl works nice & fine. But i't's the only lisp implementation i know.
There are good books on racket-scheme & chez-cheme.
The only book i know for lisp is, "Common lisp , a gentle introduction to symbolic computing".

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] aartaka@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago (13 children)

TL;DR: Use SBCL or CCL. Others—maybe, but likely in their own specific niches.

I want to give more chances to implementations there are, so here's my experience, in the order of preference:

  • SBCL is good. De-facto standard. The REPL experience is... not the best, but practical. Debugger loop is snappy, though.
  • CCL (Clozure Common Lisp) is extremely good for development: it is attentive to style, it has exhaustive type checks, it has a nice REPL (probably the best of open-source implementations, on par with Allegro) and a debugger with actually useful stack traces.
  • ECL is embeddable, and that's its biggest value proposition: you can run it anywhere C runs and you can interact with C-based software easily. Beyond this platform-friendliness, ECL has reasonable code optimization abilities and a practical REPL.
  • ABCL is useful if you interface with JVM. So if you need to work with Java in Lisp, it's either Clojure or ABCL. Implementation and REPL experience is somewhat simplistic, but let's give it a chance.
  • CLISP is abandonware, even though the riches of the golden age when it was researched and worked on are still there.
  • Allegro is proprietary, which sucks. Given that it's proprietary, it doesn't have as much contributors as, for instance, SBCL. So it actually is worse than open-source impls. But it has a nice inspirational REPL. If you don't need a commercial support license for a huge company, then you likely don't need Allegro.

I haven't tried Clasp, Corman, CMUCL, and LispWorks. So no review for them. I tried GCL, but let's not talk about that.

[–] Soupeeee@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

CMUCL is basically a worse version of SBCL. SBCL is a fork of CMUCL with the goal of being more maintainable. Some things have been backported between the two, and there maybe a few things present in CMUCL that aren't in SBCL, but I think most of the interesting things have been added back in.

Clasp is to C++ like what ABCL is to Java. I haven't done much more that fire it up to see if it would run, but it's C++ integration looks fantastic.

[–] lispm@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago

CMUCL is also way behind it platform support. CMUCL is mostly limited to being a 32bit application (IIRC). SBCL OTOH supports various 64bit platforms, incl. ARM64 on Linux and macOS.

load more comments (11 replies)