lisp

What is the Lisp convention about how many semicolons to use for different kinds of comments (and what the level of indentation for various numbers of semicolons should be)? Also, is there any convention about when to use semicolon comments and when to use #|multiline comments|# (assuming they exist and exist on multiple implementations)? In Common Lisp: ;;;; At the top of source files ;;; Comments at the beginning of the line (defun test (a &optional b) ;; Commends indented along with code (do-something a) ; Comments indented at column 40, or the last (do-something-else b)) ; column + 1 space

I am very very interested in Macros and just beginning to understand its true power. Please help me collect some great usage of macro systems. So far I have these constructs: Pattern Matching: Andrew Wright and Bruce Duba. Pattern matching for Scheme, 1995 Relations in the spirit of Prolog: Dorai Sitaram. Programming in schelog. http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/dorai/schelog/schelog.html Daniel P. Friedman, William E. Byrd, and Oleg Kiselyov. The Reasoned Schemer. The MIT Press, July 2005 Matthias Felleisen. Transliterating Prolog into Scheme. Technical Report 182, Indiana University, 1985.

I have experimented with Lisp (actually Scheme) and found it to be a very beautiful language that I am interested in learning more about. However, it appears that Lisp is never used in serious projects, and I haven't seen it listed as a desired skill on any job posting. I am interested in hearing from anyone who has used Lisp or seen it used in the "real world", or who knows whether it is considered a purely academic language. Matthias Benkard Franz, Inc. provides an inexhaustive list of success stories on their website. However: Please don't assume Lisp is only useful for Animation and

What is the best way to do GUIs in Clojure ? Is there an example of some functional Swing or SWT wrapper? Or some integration with JavaFX declarative GUI description which could be easily wrapped to s-expressions using some macrology? Any tutorials? Dave Ray I will humbly suggest Seesaw . Here's a REPL-based tutorial that assumes no Java or Swing knowledge. Seesaw's a lot like what @tomjen suggests. Here's "Hello, World": (use 'seesaw.core) (-> (frame :title "Hello" :content "Hello, Seesaw" :on-close :exit) pack! show!) and here's @Abhijith and @dsm's example, translated pretty literally: (ns

This question already has an answer here: Using AND with the apply function in Scheme 9 answers I tried it in Racket like this > (apply and '(1 2 3)) . and: bad syntax in: and > (and 1 2 3) 3 Does anyone have ideas about this? Joshua Taylor Chris Jester-Young's answer is right, but there's one other point I want to highlight. The standard and operator is a macro which delays the evaluation of its arguments, by (essentially, if not exactly) turning (and a b c) into (if a (if b c #f) #f) . This means that if a is false, b and c do not get evaluated. We also have the option of defining an and

I have this homework in LISP where I need to sort out atoms and then sublists from a list. I'm sure this is supposed to be easy task but as I'm not much of a programmer then this is really taking quite a while for me to understand. I have this list of numbers: (5 -1 (2 6 1) (8 7 -3) (0 (9 4)) -6) And if I understand correctly my task then I should get something like this: (5 -1 -6 (2 6 1) (8 7 -3) (0 (9 4))) So far all I found out is how to count atoms and/or sublists but I don't need that. (DEFUN ATOMNUMBER (L) (COND ((NULL L) 0) ((ATOM (CAR L)) (+ 1 (ATOMNUMBER (CDR L)))) (T (ATOMNUMBER (CDR

What is the difference between (cons 2 3) and '(2 . 3) in Lisp? '(2 . 3) is a dotted pair. (cons 2 3) creates a dotted pair too. So these should evaluate to the same thing. So one is a literal for a dotted pair, the other one creates a dotted pair. They are not exactly the same, even though they evaluate to the same values in the REPL. Consider these examples, in which cons cells are modified destructively: TEST> (defun literal-cons () (let ((cons '(1 . 2))) (incf (cdr cons)) cons)) LITERAL-CONS TEST> (literal-cons) (1 . 3) TEST> (literal-cons) (1 . 4) TEST> (literal-cons) (1 . 5) Compared to