lottaquestions has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
akoana has quit [Quit: leaving]
pillton has joined #commonlisp
<Demosthenex>
jmercouris: egad man! the humanity!
Oladon has joined #commonlisp
<beach>
Good morning everyone!
wanagnuj has joined #commonlisp
Lord_of_Life_ has joined #commonlisp
Lord_of_Life has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
Lord_of_Life_ is now known as Lord_of_Life
<dsk>
Do any of the general-purpose Lisp libraries have something like SUBSEQ that returns a vector displaced to its input vector? Would this be advisable?
<dsk>
No particular reason, I'm just noodling.
<aeth>
possibly, but common wisdom is that displacement is inefficient so working with indices is preferable where possible
<aeth>
so most functions (built-in and not) tend to have start/end or start1/end1/start2/end2
<aeth>
with the idea being that you'd only subseq at the final step, if at all
<dsk>
Seems like it would nice to be able to use MAP-INTO or something to destructively modify a displaced subvector.
<dsk>
But I see your point.
<dsk>
I wonder if it would be more or less efficient in general than using (SETF SUBSEQ) on vectors.
<Bike>
i have some half formed code that would allow things like map-into of a subsequence, but i didn't have enough of a use case to finish it up
materialfuture has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<pillton>
I once started writing a loop style macro which optimised things like (my-loop for x in (subseq array 3 5) do ...). Once you go down that route, you want to start to handle composition of operators, and the library (and its extensions) quickly become complicated.
<dsk>
Also, yeah, I suppose most of the time displaced vectors aren't going to impose a huge burden and they have the benefit of working with existing sequence functions.
Bike has quit [Quit: leaving]
mindCrime has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
Oladon has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
Lycurgus has joined #commonlisp
froggey has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
froggey has joined #commonlisp
Lycurgus has quit [Quit: Exeunt]
silasfox has joined #commonlisp
Oladon has joined #commonlisp
Cymew has joined #commonlisp
pillton has quit [Quit: ERC (IRC client for Emacs 27.2)]
tkj1028 has joined #commonlisp
karlosz has quit [Quit: karlosz]
shka has joined #commonlisp
pve has joined #commonlisp
Oladon has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
_whitelogger has joined #commonlisp
karlosz has joined #commonlisp
tkj1028 has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
Duuqnd has joined #commonlisp
contrapunctus has left #commonlisp [#commonlisp]
contrapunctus has joined #commonlisp
heisig has joined #commonlisp
attila_lendvai has joined #commonlisp
dale has joined #commonlisp
silasfox has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
tkj1028 has joined #commonlisp
cage has joined #commonlisp
Jach has joined #commonlisp
ad-absurdum has joined #commonlisp
tkj1028 has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
tkj1028 has joined #commonlisp
hendursaga has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
hendursaga has joined #commonlisp
stylewarning has quit [Changing host]
stylewarning has joined #commonlisp
karlosz has quit [Quit: karlosz]
silasfox has joined #commonlisp
kevingal has joined #commonlisp
<jmercouris>
Demosthenex: it is a price that way pay
samebchase has joined #commonlisp
yitzi has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
yitzi has joined #commonlisp
yitzi has quit [Quit: Leaving]
tkj1028 has quit [Quit: godspeed]
selwyn has joined #commonlisp
amk has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
cage has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
amk has joined #commonlisp
igemnace has quit [Quit: WeeChat 3.1]
azimut has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
azimut has joined #commonlisp
dsk has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
wanagnuj has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
silasfox has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
random-nick has joined #commonlisp
<shka>
hi all
<shka>
how do i create posix fifo on linux using CL?
<shka>
osicat?
<pjb>
or plain cffi…
<pjb>
or uiop:run-program "mkfifo"
<shka>
ok
cage has joined #commonlisp
tyson2 has joined #commonlisp
waleee has joined #commonlisp
dsk has joined #commonlisp
yitzi has joined #commonlisp
waleee has quit [Quit: WeeChat 3.1]
sabra has joined #commonlisp
waleee has joined #commonlisp
SAL9000 has joined #commonlisp
Duuqnd has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
djuber has joined #commonlisp
leeb has joined #commonlisp
scymtym has joined #commonlisp
selwyn_ has joined #commonlisp
selwyn has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
<jmercouris>
So nobody has interfaced CL to nodejs?
djuber has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<flip214>
and hopefully nobody will
<jmercouris>
Lmao
<tux0r>
flip214 +1
<jackdaniel>
CL-on-wheels
<flip214>
that sounds like Ruby-on-Rails.
<flip214>
"CL on wheelbarrow"
<beach>
Wasn't there a "Lisp on Lines"?
<beach>
... another LOL.
<flip214>
"Leave our #Lisp!" but now the channel name has changed...
<engblom>
Urrgg! Cobol is the last thing I ever want to encounter. Our company (small with only 12 employed) got a legacy system running on IBM Power (AIX) written in Cobol. When I saw that IBM has released a Cobol compiler for x86 Linux I contacted them to ask what it would cost thinking we could recompile it and run it on a modern Linux virtual machine. One year of Cobol compiler costs something like 11.000
<engblom>
EUR. It is sickening.
<engblom>
Luckily the old Cobol system is not mission critical anymore.
<tux0r>
flip214, the problem is that commercial cobol systems have (intrinsic) functions which are rarely mirrored on gnucobol
<tux0r>
e.g. microfocus cobol comes with .net integration. good luck!
<shka>
lol@downhil.sh
Bike has joined #commonlisp
<shka>
i will keep the lisp on lines name in mind
waleee has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
<jcowan>
Lower level languages need patterns and frameworks and such because they are insufficiently expressive. "In [Lisp] there is only one pattern: use the language."
waleee has joined #commonlisp
<shka>
oh, there are some patterns that pop-up here and there
<jackdaniel>
is it conforming to return the #'call-next-method? the spec says that it has indefinite extent but I'm still sceptical
<shka>
jackdaniel: it is legal, but not portable
<jackdaniel>
what do you mean?
<shka>
ABCL
<jackdaniel>
so it is OK in the light of the standard?
<shka>
it is ok, but it won't work on the ABCL
<jackdaniel>
alright, thank you
<shka>
glad to be of service
<shka>
jackdaniel: disclaimer, it may not work on other lisp implementations, i never tested it
<jackdaniel>
sure, but then I will just complain to maintainers :)
* jackdaniel
complains to easye
<phoe>
jackdaniel: "and can only be used within the body of a method defined by a method-defining form."
<shka>
phoe: notice that "used" != "called"
<jackdaniel>
that means that it is lexically scoped
<phoe>
lexical scope is mentioned earlier in that paragraph, explicitly
<phoe>
shka: yes, that's the puzzling part
<shka>
jackdaniel: actually, i think that ABCL may be patched now
<jackdaniel>
I don't see how explicitly mentioning it earlier invalidate what I've said
<phoe>
jackdaniel: "use" seems not to be specified in CLHS so I don't know what it means that it cannot be used outside the body of a method defined by a method-defining form
Colleen has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<jackdaniel>
sure, I'm puzzled about the remark starting with "lexical scope is mentioned earlier…"
<shka>
phoe: i am pretty sure that this simply refers to the fact that it is a local function
Colleen has joined #commonlisp
<phoe>
jackdaniel: "The function call-next-method has lexical scope and indefinite extent and can only be used within the body of a method defined by a method-defining form." - it would be weird if the first and third part were actually one and the same thing
<phoe>
like, English-wise
<shka>
phoe: and i recall that heiseig was doing something shady with capturing #'call-next-method
<phoe>
I assume it means something like "you cannot call CALL-NEXT-METHOD outside a DEFMETHOD body"
<jackdaniel>
then having indefinite extent is meaningless
<phoe>
yes, that's the second puzzling part
<phoe>
I assume that "indefinite extent" is enough for it to be returnable from the method
<jackdaniel>
otoh "lexical scope" and "can't be used outside of the method-defining form" may mean: it is guaranteed that call-next-method is defined in the lexical scope of the method
<phoe>
I think that's a fair assumptiopn
<jackdaniel>
it may be globally bound, but using it is not legal outside
<shka>
phoe: i would expect to have information on the error signaled when call-next-method is called in invalid dynamic scope
<shka>
but there is no
<shka>
*none
crc has left #commonlisp [#commonlisp]
ldb has joined #commonlisp
<shka>
unless you refer The consequences of attempting to use call-next-method outside of a method-defining form are undefined. as it
<shka>
but given the context of it regarding fbound i would assume that here use != call
<shka>
anyway
<shka>
phoe: i would say that "use" is about the lexical scope, when CLHS is talking about calling it explicitly uses "call" word
<shka>
even in this section
<phoe>
yep
heisig has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
waleee has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
<beach>
I pass #'call-next method to external functions in SICL methods.
<beach>
I think the standard says it should work.
spacebat1 has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
spacebat1 has joined #commonlisp
selwyn_ has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<jackdaniel>
thanks
cage has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
yitzi has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
ad-absurdum has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<shka>
jackdaniel: yeah, funcall #'call-next-method will work with the most recent version of abcl as well now, fixed 8 months ago
<jackdaniel>
oh, that's cool
* phoe
adds this to the errata
<jeosol>
Good morning guys, anyone using (st-json:write-json-to-string ...) I get this subtle error where 1 in my arrays of floats are written as 1.e+0, and 6 as 6.e+0. This causes errors json parsers I tried online. If I change those instances to 1.0e+0, and 6.0e+0, every works fine. Any ideas on how to sort this out, or another library I could try
<flip214>
I'm using YASON
<jeosol>
flip214: thanks, let me try yason
ldb has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
yitzi has joined #commonlisp
ldb has joined #commonlisp
Inline has quit [Quit: Leaving]
Cymew has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
ldb has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
Inline has joined #commonlisp
igemnace has joined #commonlisp
ldb has joined #commonlisp
<Xach>
phoe: fixed. the redirect confuses my dumb software.
<phoe>
Xach: thanks
lottaquestions has joined #commonlisp
ldb has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
sunset_NOVA has joined #commonlisp
srhm has joined #commonlisp
<NotThatRPG>
flip214: I assume that something in st-json is using format and has the wrong spec for the width of the printout (in particular, needs at least 1 digit to the right of the decimal point). I have only used CL-JSON, myself.
ldb has joined #commonlisp
* NotThatRPG
feels like at least one of these should be called NIH-JSON
<phoe>
oh that'll be my unfinished one
cage has joined #commonlisp
selwyn has joined #commonlisp
igemnace has quit [Quit: WeeChat 3.1]
ldb has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
ldb has joined #commonlisp
dsk has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
ldb has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
ldb has joined #commonlisp
Lycurgus has joined #commonlisp
ldb has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
ldb has joined #commonlisp
ldb has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
massma has joined #commonlisp
ldb has joined #commonlisp
antoszka has joined #commonlisp
ldb has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
Lycurgus has quit [Quit: Exeunt]
ldb has joined #commonlisp
sunset_NOVA has quit [Quit: Leaving]
ldb has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
Josh_2 has joined #commonlisp
mindCrime has joined #commonlisp
sunset_NOVA has joined #commonlisp
sunset_NOVA has quit [Client Quit]
Nicolas11 has joined #commonlisp
ldb has joined #commonlisp
mariari has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
ldb has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
ldb has joined #commonlisp
waleee has joined #commonlisp
Nicolas11 has quit [Quit: Client closed]
mindCrime has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
amk has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
amk has joined #commonlisp
Steeve has joined #commonlisp
ldb has quit [Quit: ERC (IRC client for Emacs 27.2)]
massma has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<jcowan>
You can't ever have thread-safety on a given db connecttion, because the connections are stateful
<jcowan>
but iit is normally possible to create any number of connections
<shka>
jcowan: yeah, it was silly question
<jcowan>
np, silly questtions sometimes get good answers (as opposed to merely routine ones like this). For whatever reason, even SQLite can't use a connection on more than one thread (probably more trouble than they are worth)
contrapunctus has left #commonlisp [#commonlisp]
zacts has joined #commonlisp
tophullyte has joined #commonlisp
contrapunctus has joined #commonlisp
amk has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
amk has joined #commonlisp
karlosz has joined #commonlisp
selwyn has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
amb007 has joined #commonlisp
tyson2 has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
karlosz has quit [Quit: karlosz]
gaqwas has joined #commonlisp
Lycurgus has joined #commonlisp
selwyn has joined #commonlisp
mariari has joined #commonlisp
cage has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
derelict has joined #commonlisp
karlosz has joined #commonlisp
tyson2 has joined #commonlisp
amb007 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
ivche has joined #commonlisp
zacts has quit [Quit: bbl]
Lycurgus has quit [Quit: Exeunt]
azimut has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
azimut has joined #commonlisp
mariari has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
mariari has joined #commonlisp
selwyn has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<jackdaniel>
thanks, the idea originates in scymtym branch (but I've taken a slightly different approach)
ivche has quit [Quit: Adios! - sent from ERC]
ivche has joined #commonlisp
silasfox has joined #commonlisp
ivche has left #commonlisp [ERC (IRC client for Emacs 27.2)]
fourier has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
yitzi has quit [Quit: Leaving]
selwyn has joined #commonlisp
akoana has joined #commonlisp
waleee has joined #commonlisp
pve has quit [Quit: leaving]
mindCrime has joined #commonlisp
waleee has quit [Quit: WeeChat 3.1]
waleee has joined #commonlisp
<pl>
jcowan: most database protocols don't have any level of asynchronous behaviour
* jcowan
nods
<pl>
SQLite is even worse, because it's not a connection, it's actual calls to modifying data on disk
<tux0r>
sqlite is a mistake.
<jcowan>
Nevertheless, when you open a SQLite database from C, the resulting object is called a "database connection handle", even though there is no network connection.
<jcowan>
tux0r: How so?
<tux0r>
sqlite lacks features and performance (in concurrent environments)
<tux0r>
postgresql is almost always a wiser choice
<pl>
not everything needs postgres
<tux0r>
in embedded systems where having the database integrated with the application, bdb might be an alternative
<pl>
sometime you really don't need anything much
<jcowan>
On the other hand, it does not require a separate server process, and takes extreme measures to protect you from data loss.
<pl>
and bdb is... not a good alternative
<tux0r>
pl: chances are that you won't even need an actual database then
<jcowan>
It is if key-value iis enough.
<pl>
/especially/ in embedded
<tux0r>
sqlite is a database, not a "key-value store"
<tux0r>
if K/V is all you need, you can go lower.
<jcowan>
SQLite is a database because it is ACID, and so is bdb.
<pl>
bdb is not a good solution because it's much harder to integrate, and depending on which version we're talking, with hostile licensing in the mix
<pl>
jcowan: SQLite is a database because it provides a way to manage data. For the same reason a filesystem is a database
<jcowan>
"good" and "bad" judgements only make sense if you specify a purpose.
<jcowan>
also, the AGPL may or may not be a hostile license, depending on your purpose.
<pl>
SQLite big benefit is that a) it has well-supported file format so it's easier to work with b) it fits in a header if you are dealing with C
<jcowan>
"fits in a header"?
<aeth>
Afaik, AGPL is a de facto "non-commercial" license without actually being NC like the Creative Commons licenses, thus keeping it FOSS. However, some cloud providers got around even that afaik.
<pl>
jcowan: I was thinking more of how original BDB evolved to something owned by Oracle
<aeth>
But in general, nobody commercial wanting to touch AGPL can be a feature
<jcowan>
"Proprietary".
* phoe
cough cough on-topicness cough
<pl>
I avoid AGPL despite not having any issue with GPL. It's simply an even bigger mess in legal terms, and I do not like wondering if I'll get a drive-by lawsuit because somewhere I've used non-GPL software with something AGPLed on the same disk
* jcowan
acknowledges the cough
* aeth
acknowledges three coughs
* pl
is no longer OP, doesn't have to give good example anymore :P but the topic had run dry
<phoe>
now you do
<pl>
waaaaaaaaat
mindCrime has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
robin has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
attila_lendvai has quit [Quit: Leaving]
heisig has joined #commonlisp
derelict has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
heisig has quit [Quit: Leaving]
azimut_ has joined #commonlisp
azimut has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
gaqwas has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
dsk has joined #commonlisp
attila_lendvai has joined #commonlisp
srhm has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
selwyn has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]