GalaxyNova has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
shmorg83 has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
alfiee has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
msv has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
msv has joined #commonlisp
msv has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
msv has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
edgar-rft_ has joined #commonlisp
edgar-rft` has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
ColinRobinson has quit [Quit: praxis.meansofproduction.biz (juan@acm.org)]
amb007 has joined #commonlisp
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
ebrasca has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Guest47 has joined #commonlisp
bpanthi977 has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
amb007 has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
alfiee has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
zwr has joined #commonlisp
istewart has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
chomwitt1 has joined #commonlisp
Pixel_Outlaw has joined #commonlisp
green has joined #commonlisp
domovod has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
King_julian has joined #commonlisp
alfiee has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
rainthree has joined #commonlisp
Guest47_ has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
Guest47 has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
vardhan has joined #commonlisp
vardhan_ has joined #commonlisp
vardhan has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
vardhan has joined #commonlisp
King_julian has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
Guest47_ has quit [Quit: My MacBook Air has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
pabs3 has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
amb007 has joined #commonlisp
amb007 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
alfiee has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
rainthree has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
amb007 has joined #commonlisp
bendersteed has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
rainthree has joined #commonlisp
pve has joined #commonlisp
Pixel_Outlaw has quit [Quit: Leaving]
rainthree has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
mishoo has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
u0_a660 has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
u0_a660 has quit [Quit: WeeChat 4.5.1]
u0_a660 has joined #commonlisp
alfiee has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
Th30n has joined #commonlisp
u0_a660 has quit [Quit: WeeChat 4.5.1]
u0_a660 has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
u0_a660 is now known as akoana
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
varjag has joined #commonlisp
Guest47 has joined #commonlisp
akoana has quit [Quit: WeeChat 4.5.1]
akoana has joined #commonlisp
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
vardhan has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
vardhan_ has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
alfiee has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
Th30n has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
slyrus has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
King_julian has joined #commonlisp
Th30n has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
alfiee has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
apac has joined #commonlisp
apac has quit [Client Quit]
pabs3 has joined #commonlisp
Th30n has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Th30n has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
Guest47_ has joined #commonlisp
King_julian has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
Guest47 has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
akoana has quit [Quit: WeeChat 4.5.1]
chomwitt1 has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
rudi has joined #commonlisp
rudi has quit [Client Quit]
rudi has joined #commonlisp
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
rudi has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
alfiee has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
zwr has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
rudi has joined #commonlisp
King_julian has joined #commonlisp
rudi has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
rudi has joined #commonlisp
rudi has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
rudi has joined #commonlisp
zwr has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
mwnaylor has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
alfiee has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
Devon has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
rudi has quit [Quit: rudi]
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
alfiee has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
alternateved has joined #commonlisp
AetherWind has joined #commonlisp
random-nick has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
JuanDaugherty has joined #commonlisp
ebrasca has joined #commonlisp
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
JuanDaugherty has quit [Quit: praxis.meansofproduction.biz (juan@acm.org)]
alfiee has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
yaneko has quit [Quit: parting]
yaneko has joined #commonlisp
rainthree has joined #commonlisp
akoana has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
King_julian has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
ingeniot has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
Guest47_ has quit [Quit: My MacBook Air has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
Guest47 has joined #commonlisp
ingeniot has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
alfiee has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
cmack has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
dnhester26 has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
surabax has joined #commonlisp
JuanDaugherty has joined #commonlisp
<dnhester26>
Loop question: I have a loop for which I need to have variables depending on the value of a previously bound variable, is it possible to do it with the `with` keyword? I've done something like this before, just don't have the code offhand, but I'm getting an error where ,(loop for i in (list 1 2 3) with j = (* 2 i) do (princ j)) is telling me j is nil, any ideas?
<ixelp>
(loop for i in (list 1 2 3) with j = (* 2 i) do (princ j)) ERROR: The value NIL is not of the expected type NUMBER.
<dnhester26>
yes, exactly, that's the error I get :D
<beach>
Maybe you want FOR instead of WITH.
<beach>
WITH is executed once in the beginning of the loop.,
<dnhester26>
ah, for makes the bindings sequential instead of parallel? thanks, I'll look it up in the reference now
<beach>
dnhester26: (setf i (1+ i)) is better expressed as (incf i)
<beach>
dnhester26: And usually the WITH clauses are written first, but that
<beach>
...might not illustrate your point.
Lord_of_Life has quit [Excess Flood]
Lord_of_Life has joined #commonlisp
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
ski has joined #commonlisp
<dnhester26>
is there a shortcut for: (setf list1 (nconc list1 (list 2 3 4))). Like push, but I want to append a list of items, not push a list into the list, but the values themselves
<ixelp>
loop | Common Lisp (New) Language Reference
King_julian has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
<beach>
You replaced only one instance of (setf i (1+ i)).
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
<beach>
Otherwise, looks good.
<dnhester26>
oh I missed that one, thanks for pointing it out. Just fixed it, should be building now in github (takes a couple of mins)
<dnhester26>
thanks for looking it over!
<beach>
Sure.
<scymtym>
beach: i think and do is for cases like when test collect expr and do expr
<beach>
That I can imagine, but not after a DO already.
<scymtym>
i see. you meant useless in one of the given examples
<beach>
Yes, with DO ... AND DO ...
<dnhester26>
I have a function which I want to use and I have classes with slots named with the same names as the keys to the function. I am generating a plist from the slots and doing (apply #'foo list-of-args) but for some reason they are not being recognized. The printed list of arguments look like this `(#:HOST "localhost" #:PORT 1025 #:SSL :TLS :ALLOW-OTHER-KEYS T)`. Do you know if it's because the symbols are not interned? or why isn't it
<dnhester26>
working?
josrr has joined #commonlisp
<beach>
You typically can't use uninterned symbols when keywords are wanted.
<dnhester26>
ok, thanks
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
<beach>
I mean, the symbols have to be EQ, and a keyword symbol (or any interned symbol) can't be EQ to an uninterned symbol.
<beach>
You can of course use uninterned symbols as the "keywords" in a lambda list, but you must then be very careful so that the same symbols are passed to the function all.
wvc has joined #commonlisp
<dnhester26>
thanks, for some reason doing (intern "PORT") is not enough, it still doesn't recognize it as a valid keyword, any ideas? is it the package? but when I call the function from my cl-user I don't specify the symbol's package
<beach>
You have to intern it in the keyword package.
<bike>
you should generally specify the package to intern as a matter of course
wvc has quit [Quit: Client closed]
<dnhester26>
ah, now everything works. thanks. I got confused. When in any package, if I just write `:hello`, it's interned in the keyword package, but why? shouldn't it be interned in the current package? e.g. cl-user when I haven't done any `in-package`? Why is this the default behaviour?
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
JuanDaugherty has joined #commonlisp
mi6x3m has joined #commonlisp
<mi6x3m>
hey, does case support destructuring in the key-form?
<beach>
The syntax :MUMBLE means that the reader interns MUMBLE in the keyword package.
<dnhester26>
beach: yeah, my question is: why was that the decided behavior in the spec?
<dnhester26>
I find it a bit counter intuitive. Maybe because it allows using keywords without specifying the package when using functions from another package, I see that as a plus. But I'm just curious as to why
rainthree has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
<beach>
Interning it in the current package would be redundant. If you just leave out : then that's what happens. Keywords are used so often it was worth inventing a reader syntax.
<dnhester26>
Ok, so it's a convenience as I suspected, thanks
alfiee has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
<beach>
mi6x3m: No, just a list of cases.
<mi6x3m>
beach, thanks!
pranav has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
JuanDaugherty has quit [Quit: praxis.meansofproduction.biz (juan@acm.org)]
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
pranav has joined #commonlisp
pranav has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
prokhor has quit [Quit: Leaving]
apac has joined #commonlisp
prokhor has joined #commonlisp
gooba has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<beach>
Sure.
gooba has joined #commonlisp
dnhester26 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
gooba has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
AetherWind has quit [Quit: leaving]
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
triffid has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
dnhester26 has joined #commonlisp
triffid has joined #commonlisp
apac has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
Guest47 has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
bendersteed has quit [Quit: bendersteed]
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
alfiee has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
gooba has joined #commonlisp
varjag has quit [Quit: ERC 5.5.0.29.1 (IRC client for GNU Emacs 29.3)]
Guest47 has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
pranav has joined #commonlisp
mi6x3m has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
prokhor has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
prokhor has joined #commonlisp
prokhor_ has joined #commonlisp
dnhester26 has quit []
prokhor has quit [Client Quit]
jonatack has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
skin has joined #commonlisp
green has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
jonatack has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
dnhester26 has joined #commonlisp
<dnhester26>
aeth: what did you mean by "so you can probably still see a considerable long run productivity benefit even in high-performance code."?
<dnhester26>
Full quote "However, C and C++ culture is "cryptically crash, sometimes very far from where the error is" so you can probably still see a considerable long run productivity benefit even in high-performance code."
<beach>
dnhester26: I saw what aeth wrote, and my remark is that there are probably domains where performance is so important that modularity and maintainability won't matter. But I maintain that it is impossible to write a large C++ program that is both fast and modular.
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
<beach>
And I am guessing that aeth is working in one of those domains.
<dnhester26>
beach: is that what aeth meant? or are you replying to his comment?
<dnhester26>
I just didn't understand what his sentence meant
<beach>
I don't think aeth meant what I just said, no.
<dnhester26>
ah ok
<dnhester26>
I just didn't understand that sentence
<beach>
It is often not obvious (to me) what aeth means.
<dnhester26>
If we have a running lisp image, would it be possible to make a refactoring tool which would allow for renaming symbols easily semantically and not just based on text?
<beach>
You can't rename symbols.
alfiee has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
Inline has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<dnhester26>
ah ok, I still don't undestand that sentence haha as I'm catching up with the chats from before, sometimes it's just hard to understand. I feel like there were a few words or sentences missing there
<dnhester26>
sorry, I meant renaming a function
<dnhester26>
and all it's usages
<beach>
That would be very tricky. You would have to recompile every function that calls the renamed function. And that is not always possible, because you would need to re-establish the same compile-time environment that was around when those functions were called the first time.
<beach>
A particular implementation might allow this, but there is no portable way that I can see.
<dnhester26>
Interesting I think you answered based on a mistake in the way I worded the question. I'm not quite interested in modifying a running lisp, I just want to make refactoring easier e.g. renaming functions, so would starting a lisp image and loading the system allow for renaming that works for all the regular cases?
<dnhester26>
regular cases meaning not when a string is generated and interned to then find the function of that symbol... just the regular uses like (foo) or (bar #'foo) to rename foo
<beach>
Oh, so the "running Lisp image" was unimportant. OK.
<dnhester26>
and package prefixes, etc
<dnhester26>
I just meant an approach that works with some degree of certainty greater than simple text based search and replace
<dnhester26>
So I thought that starting an image and loading the system would potentially allow for finding every place where the function is referenced for an easer way to rename
<beach>
You want to do the renaming in the source files, yes?
<beach>
Yes, it's the same question that jmercouris had, I think.
<dnhester26>
Well he just wanted to do a refactor, I'm wondering if it's possible to build a tool for refactoring which will solve the issues you mention by loading the system into the image and then using SBCL or some implementation which would allow to distinguish between funtions or variables etc
<beach>
A code walker can do such things.
bpanthi977 has joined #commonlisp
<beach>
I don't know that anybody configured a code walker specifically for such tasks.
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
dnhester26 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
bpanthi977 has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
cage has joined #commonlisp
cage has quit [Excess Flood]
ColinRobinson has joined #commonlisp
<jmercouris>
maybe it exists in commercial lisp editors?
<jmercouris>
perhaps in lispworks?
<beach>
That's entirely possible.
Thermoriax has quit [Quit: Off and away...]
green has joined #commonlisp
cage has joined #commonlisp
<beach>
I guess the task is not that hard if all you want is to handle calls to global functions.
<beach>
SBCL has who-calls information as I recall. Then you need to figure out in which file that caller is located.
ec has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
ec has joined #commonlisp
domovod has quit [Quit: WeeChat 4.5.1]
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
green has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
green has joined #commonlisp
alfiee has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
ebrasca has joined #commonlisp
dnhester26 has joined #commonlisp
dnhester26 has quit []
dnhester26 has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
Guest47_ has joined #commonlisp
Guest47 has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
Lord_of_Life_ has joined #commonlisp
Lord_of_Life has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
Lord_of_Life_ is now known as Lord_of_Life
<aeth>
dnhester26: I mean that even if there isn't much of a difference between C or C++ and a higher-level language where low-level microoptimizations are concerned, this former category of languages just doesn't give you any compiler help at all. Welcome to "Segmentation fault". Now find it.
<aeth>
You can try valgrind. Hope your program still runs fast enough.
<aeth>
beach: C and C++ always make you care about (micro-optimized) performance. This is usually not a good tradeoff, but someone like Carmack, in the 1990s, probably wouldn't see much of a gain by using a Lisp instead. These days it may be different, though, with SIMD. Assuming such an optimizing, autovectorizing compiler existed.
mi6x3m has joined #commonlisp
<aeth>
C is very much a scalar language.
mi6x3m has quit [Client Quit]
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
parjanya has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
alfiee has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
<dnhester26>
aeth: thanks for explaining what you meant
dnhester26 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
dnhester26 has joined #commonlisp
Thermoriax has joined #commonlisp
<aeth>
And as much as some people talk about garbage collection, it seems entirely irrelevant here, at least for a language with reasonable semantics. If you want predictability, you object pool / preallocate in a GCed language. But you also don't want the cost of malloc() or lots of little allocations, so you'd do the exact same thing in a language without GC.
triffid has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
triffid has joined #commonlisp
dnhester26 has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
bpanthi977 has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
yaneko8 has joined #commonlisp
bpanthi977 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<ixelp>
GitHub - fare/asdf3-2013: Material about ASDF3, its history and lessons, and how to use it.
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
<jackdaniel>
skin: first there was defsystem; the portable version was written later by Mark Kantrowitz and lives today under the name mk-defsystem; later Dan Barlow wrote his own defsystem and called it ASDF
bpanthi977 has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
<jackdaniel>
later ASDF was forked by Fare as ASDF2 who worked at the same time on yet another defsystem variant XCVB, but he abandoned the effort and spinned ASDF3
<NotThatRPG>
It's very idiosyncratic to Fare AND to the fact that achieving portability is incredibly difficult. Combination of the fact that the ANSI CL spec doesn't fit modern OSes very well and that there are a lot more CL implementations than, say, perls or pythons
<NotThatRPG>
There is A LOT of very painstaking code in there to make sure that pathnames and namestrings work properly, and even with all that, there are still a bunch of remaining corner cases (I'm looking at you, symbolic links!).
<NotThatRPG>
Honestly, I don't know anyone but Fare who would have had the patience to slog through all the implementations the way he did
<aeth>
not just portability, also with-upgradeability (like UIOP) as well as the fact that afaik it gets built into one file
<aeth>
with-upgradeability so you can upgrade over the one you are currently running that you probably already have in the current image
<aeth>
you might have had to do this in UIOP to get newer features
<aeth>
but I think it also does something vaguely like continuation passing style at points?
<aeth>
it has been years since I looked into it
pve has quit [Quit: leaving]
jonatack has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
<aeth>
It might be some of the hardest CL to understand, some of which may be necessary complexity and some not (good look determining which)
bpanthi977 has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
notzmv has joined #commonlisp
jonatack has joined #commonlisp
jonatack has quit [Excess Flood]
jonatack has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
soweli_iki has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
soweli_iki has joined #commonlisp
soweli_iki has quit [Changing host]
soweli_iki has joined #commonlisp
zwr has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
josrr has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
alfiee has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
rkazak has joined #commonlisp
olnw has joined #commonlisp
bpanthi977 has joined #commonlisp
amb007 has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
bpanthi977 has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
bpanthi977 has joined #commonlisp
Demosthe1ex has joined #commonlisp
Demosthenex has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
green has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
Demosthenex has joined #commonlisp
molson_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
spdegabrielle has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
dnhester26 has joined #commonlisp
Demosthe1ex has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
dnhester26 has quit [Client Quit]
bpanthi977 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
bpanthi977 has joined #commonlisp
dnhester26 has joined #commonlisp
<dnhester26>
NotThatRPG: from your comment it seems like there were basically two issues besides the main goal of making a build system: 1) dealing with portability issues between CL implementations, and 2) dealing with potability issues between OS's. How much of that was abstracted away into trivial-* style libraries? IIRC uiop is for dealing with OSs, correct? So the other issue is the implementations. Has that code been separated into its own
<dnhester26>
library/system? is that even possible?
<dnhester26>
The reason I ask is because I am wondering about how to make it easier for people to build upon the parts already there and use them to make alternative build systems
<dnhester26>
IIRC Shinmera mentioned once in discord about disliking ASDFs code and saying it had certain issues that he would like changed or maybe to write a build system of his own. Does anyone know what are issues with ASDF that are somewhat pressing or that by fixing them could dramatically improve our CL experience?
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
alfiee has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
skin has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
bpanthi977 has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
skin has joined #commonlisp
bpanthi977 has joined #commonlisp
CrashTestDummy has joined #commonlisp
CrashTestDummy has quit [Client Quit]
bpanthi977 has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
bpanthi977 has joined #commonlisp
alternateved has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
shmorg83 has joined #commonlisp
mange has joined #commonlisp
rkazak has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
alfiee has joined #commonlisp
amb007 has joined #commonlisp
dnhester26 has quit []
alfiee has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
amb007 has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
bpanthi977 has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
<tux0r>
ASDF makes most sense with a package manager (e.g. quicklisp)
<tux0r>
thats the thing that annoys me most
<tux0r>
"here's my software as an easy-to-install system. but first install the dependencies!"
<tux0r>
rust does it better
<tux0r>
*sigh*
ColinRobinson has quit [Quit: praxis.meansofproduction.biz (juan@acm.org)]