TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Creating a Common Lisp implementation, part 1 [video]

127 点作者 zeveb超过 4 年前

4 条评论

drmeister超过 4 年前
I can testify to a lot of the difficulties Robert Strandh talks about here. We implemented a Common Lisp in C++ that interoperates with C++ (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;clasp-developers&#x2F;clasp.git" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;clasp-developers&#x2F;clasp.git</a>). I ended up implementing a lot more C++ code than I wanted to and then replacing much of it with Common Lisp versions (during startup) because it&#x27;s easier to maintain and we can use type inference to improve the performance of Common Lisp code while C++ code is &#x27;stuck&#x27; with the types you compile it with. Bootstrapping is hard.
评论 #24278599 未加载
评论 #24278248 未加载
rgrau超过 4 年前
This is part of a series that keeps happening in the Online Lisp Meetings that are held (bi?)weekly since the last ELS.<p>Today there&#x27;s one!<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;mailman.common-lisp.net&#x2F;pipermail&#x2F;online-lisp-meets&#x2F;2020-August&#x2F;000027.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;mailman.common-lisp.net&#x2F;pipermail&#x2F;online-lisp-meets&#x2F;...</a>
评论 #24280371 未加载
moonchild超过 4 年前
&gt; communication between programs uses pipes, requiring transitions through the kernel<p>Not if you use shmem.<p>&gt; it&#x27;s fairly primitive, because all you can pass is a sequence of bytes<p>Assuming you have abi sorted out, you can generally write objects directly to a pipe. If you have indirections in those objects then, again, use shmem. (If you want synchrony, you can write the objects over the pipe but share the memory referred to by those functions.)
评论 #24277678 未加载
eatonphil超过 4 年前
I don&#x27;t understand the point about tail call optimizations not being a part of C... Sure, but you can just rewrite the tail call into a loop and get the exact effect, no?
评论 #24277847 未加载
评论 #24281101 未加载
评论 #24277761 未加载