[toronto-lisp] May meeting
Will the May meeting be tomorrow? I'd personally prefer to meet next Tuesday (the 11th). Justin
Sadly I cannot make either date. Have fun guys. abram Justin Giancola wrote:
Will the May meeting be tomorrow? I'd personally prefer to meet next Tuesday (the 11th).
Justin
_______________________________________________ toronto-lisp mailing list toronto-lisp@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/toronto-lisp
I can make it, but next week would be fine too. Vish On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 8:32 PM, Paul Tarvydas <tarvydas@visualframeworksinc.com> wrote:
Will the May meeting be tomorrow? I'd personally prefer to meet next Tuesday (the 11th).
I can't make it tomorrow (May 4). If the meeting is moved to the 11th, let me know.
pt
_______________________________________________ toronto-lisp mailing list toronto-lisp@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/toronto-lisp
I've been compelled to bail out on this as well, so throw my lot in for the 11th. BC -----Original Message----- From: Paul Tarvydas [mailto:tarvydas@visualframeworksinc.com] Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 8:32 PM To: toronto-lisp@common-lisp.net Subject: Re: [toronto-lisp] May meeting
Will the May meeting be tomorrow? I'd personally prefer to meet next Tuesday (the 11th).
I can't make it tomorrow (May 4). If the meeting is moved to the 11th, let me know. pt _______________________________________________ toronto-lisp mailing list toronto-lisp@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/toronto-lisp
I don't know if this has been decided - the 11th is better for me. - Dave - On 2010-05-03, at 5:16 PM, Justin Giancola wrote:
Will the May meeting be tomorrow? I'd personally prefer to meet next Tuesday (the 11th).
Justin
_______________________________________________ toronto-lisp mailing list toronto-lisp@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/toronto-lisp
Well, that sounds like quorum. Tuesday the 11th it is. See you all next week. Justin On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 2:02 PM, David Penton <djp@arqux.com> wrote:
I don't know if this has been decided - the 11th is better for me.
- Dave -
On 2010-05-03, at 5:16 PM, Justin Giancola wrote:
Will the May meeting be tomorrow? I'd personally prefer to meet next Tuesday (the 11th).
Justin
_______________________________________________ toronto-lisp mailing list toronto-lisp@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/toronto-lisp
Just a reminder of our May meeting tomorrow -- 6pm as usual, at the Linux Caffe. Vish On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Justin Giancola <justin.giancola@gmail.com> wrote:
Well, that sounds like quorum. Tuesday the 11th it is.
See you all next week.
Justin
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 2:02 PM, David Penton <djp@arqux.com> wrote:
I don't know if this has been decided - the 11th is better for me.
- Dave -
On 2010-05-03, at 5:16 PM, Justin Giancola wrote:
Will the May meeting be tomorrow? I'd personally prefer to meet next Tuesday (the 11th).
Justin
_______________________________________________ toronto-lisp mailing list toronto-lisp@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/toronto-lisp
_______________________________________________ toronto-lisp mailing list toronto-lisp@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/toronto-lisp
While I don't have a presentation per se, I'd like to propose a discussion on macro hygiene and scoping inspired by ideas encountered in Doug's book. I'm going to try to get together a few examples during lunch at work. Justin On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 11:55 PM, Vishvajit Singh <vishvajitsingh@gmail.com> wrote:
Just a reminder of our May meeting tomorrow -- 6pm as usual, at the Linux Caffe.
Vish
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Justin Giancola <justin.giancola@gmail.com> wrote:
Well, that sounds like quorum. Tuesday the 11th it is.
See you all next week.
Justin
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 2:02 PM, David Penton <djp@arqux.com> wrote:
I don't know if this has been decided - the 11th is better for me.
- Dave -
On 2010-05-03, at 5:16 PM, Justin Giancola wrote:
Will the May meeting be tomorrow? I'd personally prefer to meet next Tuesday (the 11th).
Justin
_______________________________________________ toronto-lisp mailing list toronto-lisp@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/toronto-lisp
_______________________________________________ toronto-lisp mailing list toronto-lisp@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/toronto-lisp
I'm really sorry I missed this meeting. I'm more than happy to discuss such things on the list or private email or at the next meeting though. Happy lisping, Doug On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 12:24:54PM -0400 or thereabouts, Justin Giancola wrote:
While I don't have a presentation per se, I'd like to propose a discussion on macro hygiene and scoping inspired by ideas encountered in Doug's book. I'm going to try to get together a few examples during lunch at work.
Justin, you've probably dug this up already. Have a gander at: http://john.freml.in/macroexpand-dammit BC On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 12:24:54PM -0400 or thereabouts, Justin Giancola wrote:
While I don't have a presentation per se, I'd like to propose a discussion on macro hygiene and scoping inspired by ideas encountered in Doug's book. I'm going to try to get together a few examples during lunch at work.
_______________________________________________ toronto-lisp mailing list toronto-lisp@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/toronto-lisp
That is really interesting, but.. geez! It really drives home that Common Lisp has too many special forms. This code is practically the simplest code walker possible and it's still 300 lines. I always wondered why, for example, both LET and LET* need to be special forms, or why both FLET and LABELS need to be. It seems like only one needs to be a special form, and the other could be implemented as a macro on top of the other. TAGBODY seems like it could be written as a macro if your implementation has tail-call optimization. (I'd be interested to see someone give that a try.) One of the wonderful things in the original conception of Lisp is the small number of primitives: http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/paulgraham/jmc.lisp Vish On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Brian Connoy <BConnoy@morrisonhershfield.com> wrote:
Justin, you've probably dug this up already. Have a gander at: http://john.freml.in/macroexpand-dammit
BC
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 12:24:54PM -0400 or thereabouts, Justin Giancola wrote:
While I don't have a presentation per se, I'd like to propose a discussion on macro hygiene and scoping inspired by ideas encountered in Doug's book. I'm going to try to get together a few examples during lunch at work.
_______________________________________________ toronto-lisp mailing list toronto-lisp@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/toronto-lisp
_______________________________________________ toronto-lisp mailing list toronto-lisp@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/toronto-lisp
This code is practically the simplest code walker possible
I was premature in saying this. That code is longer than it needs to be because it's doing some clever stuff, including trying to be fully portable. If you look at pg.11 of the 2nd paper in the linked document: http://www.merl.com/reports/docs/TR93-17.pdf there is a simpler code walker that also performs macroexpand-all. Vish On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Vishvajit Singh <vishvajitsingh@gmail.com> wrote:
That is really interesting, but.. geez! It really drives home that Common Lisp has too many special forms. This code is practically the simplest code walker possible and it's still 300 lines.
I always wondered why, for example, both LET and LET* need to be special forms, or why both FLET and LABELS need to be. It seems like only one needs to be a special form, and the other could be implemented as a macro on top of the other. TAGBODY seems like it could be written as a macro if your implementation has tail-call optimization. (I'd be interested to see someone give that a try.)
One of the wonderful things in the original conception of Lisp is the small number of primitives: http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/paulgraham/jmc.lisp
Vish
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Brian Connoy <BConnoy@morrisonhershfield.com> wrote:
Justin, you've probably dug this up already. Have a gander at: http://john.freml.in/macroexpand-dammit
BC
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 12:24:54PM -0400 or thereabouts, Justin Giancola wrote:
While I don't have a presentation per se, I'd like to propose a discussion on macro hygiene and scoping inspired by ideas encountered in Doug's book. I'm going to try to get together a few examples during lunch at work.
_______________________________________________ toronto-lisp mailing list toronto-lisp@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/toronto-lisp
_______________________________________________ toronto-lisp mailing list toronto-lisp@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/toronto-lisp
participants (7)
-
Abram Hindle -
Brian Connoy -
David Penton -
doug＠hcsw.org -
Justin Giancola -
Paul Tarvydas -
Vishvajit Singh