53 entries in 0.588s
: vendor supplied lisp
, fortran, even c, compilers , which interoperated to the point of safely calling proggy written in 1, from another
: i dun think it even makes sense to think of the problem in terms of 'write a new ada
' tho. the way i see ada
, is as a junkyard wars workaround against the retardation of pc arch, where pointerolade, overflowable arrays, etc. if you had a sane arch, you could program in moar or less whatever you want (e.g on bolix, ada
, fortran, c, lisp
, were implemented as simply skins around the arch, and all shared in the nonoverflowability etc )
: As a Lisp
programmer, what drew you to Ada
: once we have a One Troo scripting language ( possibly some variant of spyked's gc-less ada lisp
.. ) i'd like to write a vtron in that ( supposing nobody else beats me to it )
: i suspect that the federated calling model of the current bash is actually its strength ; and not necessarily competed by lisp
: Logged on 2018-04-05 19:11 asciilifeform: imho the long-term answer is '3rd way' , i.e. all the crud i wrote in bash, python, etc over the years really oughta be in the hypothetical little-lisp
from old thread.
: Logged on 2018-07-07 18:19 mircea_popescu: esthlos welcome to the mechanisms of lordship. it's your project, it's your job to make this sort of decisions. "should this be rewritten in lisp
, imported in ada
, be turned into a point of grafting on eucrypt tree ?"
: esthlos welcome to the mechanisms of lordship. it's your project, it's your job to make this sort of decisions. "should this be rewritten in lisp
, imported in ada
, be turned into a point of grafting on eucrypt tree ?" ☟︎
: esthlos of course, if your whole thing is lisp
, the utility of ada
keccak may be limited ?
: Logged on 2017-10-08 14:06 phf: spyked: r5rs and tinyscheme are not the right places to start on the other, non-ada
end, i'd recommend looking at lisp
in small pieces. you can tease out the theory out of tinyscheme, but it's definitely easier not to get bogged on accidentals if you start from theory
: point being, it is actually considerably easier to write a new ada
. ( in lisp
or in whatever. )
: mod6, there's no rush there, esthlos had 90% of a working lisp
v, i expect it can be tweaked into a deliverable. can have ada
v later on.
: imho the long-term answer is '3rd way' , i.e. all the crud i wrote in bash, python, etc over the years really oughta be in the hypothetical little-lisp
from old thread. ☟︎
<-- hey, that sounds like a really neat project, I wouldn't mind adding it to the list. on a related note, /me has been on a sort of semi-holiday for the last 2 months, which led to a lot of exploration on items of potential republican interest. e.g. the ada lisp
scriptlang, an irc logger bot (which I could spin into a rss bot), the text browser thing and some out-of-the-blue ro-en Trilema ☝︎
: instead we have... what do we have? we have the blockchain but we're still using dns. we have common lisp
but we're still using scheme, or, worse, clojure. we have ada
but we're using rust. "we" being "we the people", as in the redditoid masses
: it would be nice to bootstrap an entire operating system from machine code to forth to some strange mix of forth and ada
, then tinyscheme, and finally a sane common lisp
: thanks shinohai. :D the plan is to (at the very least) periodically share items of republican interest that I'm working on (e.g. ada lisp
). progress has been very slow so far, but it's picking up
: and, back to the trunk, we've not even discussed the horror of translation. suppose you write a thing, in ada
. suppose another, who works on a lisp
tree, takes your thing and identically translates it to lisp
(here defined, that on any correct machine his code will in all cases behave indentically to yours). what's your v to do here ?
: why not actually do it then, and first construct an ada
circular ring lisp
-memory stack first ?
: ( spoiler : you can trivially implement linked list without -- properly speaking -- pointers, but with integers, this also came up in the earlier 'lisp
' thread )
: i guess he's gonna learn himself some ada
, or lisp
if anyone wants. feel free to instruct him
: he was asking for a job so i asked if he had tits, he didn't, so i said do you know lisp
: knuth managed to do a lot to keep tex what it is, given that he's essentially a pacifist academic. there aren't many other examples (common lisp
) where preservation has been taken to this extreme.
: shinohai, pretty good. gentoo diddling. I'm trying to get a new box up, learn v, compile trb, add an ada
in, learn lisp
internals ... (the list continues)
: gcc or w/e you use as a compiler,. for instance, also not an ada
dun even try what lisp
tried and failed to obtain, ie, a full universe.
: Logged on 2017-11-14 11:29 spyked: http://btcbase.org/log/2017-11-13#1737294
<-- not sure if possible with ffatronic ada
subset, though, because of "no dynamic objects" restriction. in my (yet-unpublished) prototype, lisp
memory size is a static knob.
: asciilifeform: i'm using "memory management" meaning of cons, not like lisp
101 take on it. they don't have cons meaning that there's no managed heap, there's no gc on that heap, and you can't allocate things into the heap and let it be managed by heap machinery. so they have "cons", but their ~actual~ cons is ada
's "new ..."
: Logged on 2017-11-12 23:39 mircea_popescu: does an ada lisp
~even exist~ as far as anyone knows ?
: spyked: r5rs and tinyscheme are not the right places to start on the other, non-ada
end, i'd recommend looking at lisp
in small pieces. you can tease out the theory out of tinyscheme, but it's definitely easier not to get bogged on accidentals if you start from theory ☟︎
: also, there's the memory model. lisp
machine "cells" are very elegant, while algol-like languages seem pretty muddy on that part. ftr, I have never seriously programmed in ada
(closest thing to it was pascal)
: well, problem is that there doesn't seem to be much in terms of tasteful ada
code available to public. with common lisp
you can go to mid-90s and before and you start getting some very reasonable works, worthy imitation.
: fwiw ada
is a harsh mistress is an illusion. if it were to become fashionable to write ada
among the hacker news crowd, there will be rapid attempts at modernization. common lisp
went through that process
: now then. can the lispheads live with the idea of an ada
tmsr-cryptolib ? perhaps with it as a reference and a lisp
: and the supersecret future plan of factory -> vsli -> ada
-> scheme / numeric algebra / stuff is busted open by careless accidental coversations in a public channel
's answer is given von neumann what's most flexible model, ada
's answer is given von neumann how do we put enough constraints that there are runtime reliability guarantees
: but in the course of this, i got an idea, is there a small lisp
/scheme implemented in ada
has been recently carrying out a kind of survey of programming systems ~built for adults~. so far, nominees: common lisp
, standard ml. and that's ~it~
: nah, more along the lines of "I'm a programmer" "orly, do you grok lisp
? What the primary advantages that haskell's type system provides? Ada
's test suite: comments?"
: this is -one- of the reasons why ada
(and to a slightly-lesser extent - common lisp
) is interesting
, like lisp
, is not a language. it is merely a kind of void left by removing retardation.
: and as they become obsolete in the future, ppl not wanting to upgrade their bitcoin archives will provide hdds with one of those ada
-esque eternal lives.
: You just end up poorly reimplementing Common Lisp
: adlai: interestingly, symbolics lisp
mach. had full datastructure interoperability between zetalisp, common lisp
, fortran, ada
, - even c.
: It is amusing. Still when it comes time to replace GPG it will look more like https://github.com/tedu/reop
than any Moxenslit iPerson thing (except... with RSA support and done in ADA
, like common lisp
, is interesting for the mostly-complete absence of any obviously braindamaged decisions forced upon the user