C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python

C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python

[bolega]

I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness.

For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which
writes C interpreter in C.

The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code.

Are there already answers anywhere ?

How would a gury approach such a project ?

Bolega

Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python

[Vinay]

On 2010-06-13 16:07:54 -0700, bolega <gnuist006@gmail.com> said:

> I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness.
> 
> For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which
> writes C interpreter in C.
> 
> The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code.
> 
> Are there already answers anywhere ?
> 
> How would a gury approach such a project ?
> 
> Bolega

you could read "scheme 9 from empty space". you can find it here 
http://www.t3x.org/

Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python

[Albert van der Horst]

In article <e1aa09cd-3bcd-4e9b-8f4c-e307a14246fe@a2g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
bolega  <gnuist006@gmail.com> wrote:
>I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness.
>
>For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which
>writes C interpreter in C.
>
>The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code.
>
>Are there already answers anywhere ?
>
>How would a gury approach such a project ?

He would have his 10 year LISP sink in, meditate for 10 days and
start from scratch with a typical LISP approach.

He would have his 10 year Algol68 sink in, meditate for 10 days and
start from scratch with a typical Algol68 approach.
(Scheme is not different enough from LISP, to make this interesting.
Hey Scheme *is* a dialect of LISP.)

He would have his 10 year Python sink in, meditate for 10 days and
start from scratch with a typical Python approach.

Maybe he would code "one to throw away".

The outcome would be extremely interesting, but ...

>
>Bolega

Groetjes Albert

--
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python

[fortunatus]

On Jun 13, 7:07 pm, bolega <gnuist...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness.
>
> For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which
> writes C interpreter in C.
>
> The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code.
>
> Are there already answers anywhere ?
>
> How would a gury approach such a project ?
>
> Bolega

Holy cow has this gone off topic!  To OP - start writing a C context
free grammar of a subset of C (arithmetic expressions IMHO are the
historical root of C and a good place to start in any case), start
writing a parser of a subset of your subset grammar (in a lisp of your
chioce - Scheme and CL for instance are going to be pretty much
equivalent in this task), and really the rest will be obvious...

I'd go that far before posting on the topic again...

Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python

[Tim Rentsch]

nanothermite911fbibustards <nanothermite911fbibustards@gmail.com>
writes:

>> Probably doesn't meet your intent, but this is a really impressive bit
>> of (whacky) art:
>
> Lisp runs faster than C. Once you get more time away from screwing
> Palestinians, and other false-flags, you will find ideas like these
>
> How to make Lisp go faster than C
> Didier Verna
> [snip]

Asking whether Lisp is faster than C is like asking why it's
colder in the mountains than it is in the summer.

Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python

[wolfgang.riedel]

On 20 June, 03:48, Tim Rentsch <t...@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote:
> nanothermite911fbibustards <nanothermite911fbibusta...@gmail.com>
> writes:
>

> Asking whether Lisp is faster than C is like asking why it's
> colder in the mountains than it is in the summer.

original Karl Valentin would be <colder outside than nighttime>
but yours is in his sense.

Wolfgang

Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python

[Define Macro]

On Jun 13, 7:07 pm, bolega <gnuist...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness.
>
> For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which
> writes C interpreter in C.
>
> The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code.
>
> Are there already answers anywhere ?
>
> How would a gury approach such a project ?
>
> Bolega

Maybe instead of full C, you should try something simplified, like
Tiny-C (http://primepuzzle.com/tc/) or Arena, or maybe even Pike (some
minimal variant thereof).

Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python

[Richard Bos]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:

> > I propose a vanilla C interpreter.
> 
> I think, only someone who hasn't written such a beast can put together
> "vanilla" and "C interpreter" together.

You think wrong. There is no reason to believe it impossible[1] to write
a vanilla C interpreter. In fact, it's probably slightly easier to
ensure that your implementation is _exactly_ vanilla if you make it an
interpreter rather than a compiler.
The real question is whether it's worth the trouble, writing an
interpreter and then only providing vanilla C. Presumably for didactic
reasons it could.

Richard

[1] It's certainly possible to write a C interpreter, because it's been
    done; but I don't know how vanilla they are.

Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python

[Pascal J. Bourguignon]

Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> writes:

> On 8 July, 08:08, Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On 7 July, 17:38, Rivka Miller <rivkaumil...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> > Anyone know what the first initial of L. Peter Deutsch stand for ?
>>
>> Laurence according to wikipedia (search time 2s)
>
> oops! He was born Laurence but changed it legally to "L." including
> the dot

Too bad, "Laurence" is a nice name.

-- 
__Pascal Bourguignon__                     http://www.informatimago.com/

Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python

[George Neuner]

On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 10:39:45 +0200, pjb@informatimago.com (Pascal J.
Bourguignon) wrote:

>Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> writes:
>> Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Rivka Miller <rivkaumil...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Anyone know what the first initial of L. Peter Deutsch stand for ?
>>>
>>> Laurence according to wikipedia (search time 2s)
>>
>> oops! He was born Laurence but changed it legally to "L." including
>> the dot
>
>Too bad, "Laurence" is a nice name.

He probably hates the nickname "Larry".

Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python

[bolega]

On Jun 20, 9:31 pm, Richard Fateman <fate...@cs.berkeley.edu> wrote:
> Define Macro wrote:
> > On Jun 13, 7:07 pm, bolega <gnuist...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness.
>
> >> For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which
> >> writes C interpreter in C.
>
> >> The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code.
>
> >> Are there already answers anywhere ?
>
> Sure.  Lots of texts on compilers provide exercises which, in one way or
> another suggest how to write an interpreter and perhaps a compiler too
> for some language.  Anyone taking a course on compilers is likely to
> have followed such exercises in order to pass the course.  Some
> instructors are enlightened enough to allow students to pick the
> implementation language.
>
> Ask any such instructor.



Beware, he does not tell the readers the financial details. This is
what he wrote to me by email.

<quote>
I would be willing to meet with you here in Berkeley to educate you on
these matters at a consulting rate of  $850 per hour, with a minimum
of 8 hours.

RJF
</quote>



> I think you will find that many people use a packaged parser-generator
> which eliminates much of the choice-of-language difference. Do you like
> Bison, Yacc, Antlr, or one of the many parser generators in Lisp,
> python, etc.
>
> My own experience is that in comparing Lisp to C, students end up with
> smaller and better interpreters and compilers, faster.  I don't know
> about python vs C for sure, but I suspect python wins.  As for
> python vs Lisp, I don't know.
>
> RJF

Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python

[bolega]

On Jul 13, 11:18 pm, geremy condra <debat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 11:01 PM, bolega <gnuist...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 20, 9:31 pm, Richard Fateman <fate...@cs.berkeley.edu> wrote:
> >> Define Macro wrote:
> >> > On Jun 13, 7:07 pm, bolega <gnuist...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness.
>
> >> >> For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which
> >> >> writes C interpreter in C.
>
> >> >> The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code.
>
> >> >> Are there already answers anywhere ?
>
> >> Sure.  Lots of texts on compilers provide exercises which, in one way or
> >> another suggest how to write an interpreter and perhaps a compiler too
> >> for some language.  Anyone taking a course on compilers is likely to
> >> have followed such exercises in order to pass the course.  Some
> >> instructors are enlightened enough to allow students to pick the
> >> implementation language.
>
> >> Ask any such instructor.
>
> > Beware, he does not tell the readers the financial details. This is
> > what he wrote to me by email.
>
> > <quote>
> > I would be willing to meet with you here in Berkeley to educate you on
> > these matters at a consulting rate of  $850 per hour, with a minimum
> > of 8 hours.
>
> > RJF
> > </quote>
>
> He's Berkeley's former CS chair and was implementing lisp before
> common lisp was a twinkle in anybody's eye. His time is valuable.
>
> Geremy Condra

This makes some sense. He replied on the newsgroup in a lengthy post
that there are sufficient resources out there giving hint that no one
need help me out. Then I was called "lazy" in one email and tersely
given JUST the last name of an author who has many books each many
100s pages, when I asked for a relevant book, as if i am a scholar in
the field, although he did spend lots of words on irrelevant and
unbeneficial things which diminished my enthusiasm. Now, I find out
from you that he has/had a business concern or interest in a company
that is writing/wrote lisp interpreter in C. Correct me if I am making
an error. I dont want to think deprecatingly of any good soul but this
is what i experienced.

Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python

[Seebs]

On 2010-07-15, bolega <gnuist006@gmail.com> wrote:
> This makes some sense. He replied on the newsgroup in a lengthy post
> that there are sufficient resources out there giving hint that no one
> need help me out. Then I was called "lazy" in one email and tersely
> given JUST the last name of an author who has many books each many
> 100s pages, when I asked for a relevant book, as if i am a scholar in
> the field, although he did spend lots of words on irrelevant and
> unbeneficial things which diminished my enthusiasm.

If you found those "irrelevant and unbeneficial", then while I agree that he
may have been wasting his time, he would have been wasting it even worse
trying to walk you through the technical material when you're clearly
not currently at a stage where you are ready to learn anyway.

> Now, I find out
> from you that he has/had a business concern or interest in a company
> that is writing/wrote lisp interpreter in C. Correct me if I am making
> an error. I dont want to think deprecatingly of any good soul but this
> is what i experienced.

If you are trying to imply that he was acting in some unethical way, you have
further cemented the notion that trying to talk to you is a waste of anyone's
time.  *plonk*

-s
-- 
Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!

Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python

[francogrex]

In article <16a7e301-2e85-47eb-971e-79acc4e076a6@b35g2000yqi.
googlegroups.com>, gnuist006@gmail.com says...
>This makes some sense. He replied on the newsgroup in a lengthy 
post
>that there are sufficient resources out there giving hint that 
no one
>need help me out. Then I was called "lazy" in one email and 
tersely
>given JUST the last name of an author who has many books each 
many
>100s pages, when I asked for a relevant book, as if i am a 
scholar in
>the field, although he did spend lots of words on irrelevant and
>unbeneficial things which diminished my enthusiasm. Now, I find 
out
>from you that he has/had a business concern or interest in a 
company
>that is writing/wrote lisp interpreter in C. Correct me if I am 
making
>an error. I dont want to think deprecatingly of any good soul 
but this
>is what i experienced.

No, you're not making a bad judgement. He's not the only one who 
treats newcomers with disrespect and scorn. Unfortunately many 
so-called experts in the field look down on newbies and mistreat 
them (in any programming language forum), forgetting in the 
process that they were also at a certain time newbies until 
someone gentle and nice enough teachers took the trouble to 
educate them. On the other hand there are less neurotic experts 
out there who are glad to help out someone learning. It's like in 
some universities, you have the bad "professors" who are freaks 
(probably they have a lot of problems at home, their wives 
screwing all the males on the block, daughters drug addicts etc) 
and want to take their hatred out on you, and you have the 
good and mentally stable professors who actually deserve their 
title.

Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python

[francogrex]

In article <icqj46lnoaqkdr5igvqi9so62i30cac26o@4ax.com>, gneuner2@comcast.net 
says...
>I don't think it's accurate to say that [some] experts really "scorn"
>newbies, but I do agree that newbies are occasionally mistreated.  
>
>One thing newbies have to realize is that on Usenet you are quite
>likely to be talking to people who were there at the beginning and, of
>necessity, are largely self educated in whatever the subject matter
>might be.  Many - I'd even say most - are happy to clarify
>understanding and help with complicated problems, but there is a
>general expectation that newbies have some basic research skills and
>that they have tried to solve their problem before asking for help.
>
>Unfortunately, there is a small percentage of people who think Usenet
>and other online forums are for answering homework questions or for
>digging out of a jam at work.  Getting help depends a lot on how the
>question is asked: strident pleas for quick help or demands for an
>answer are immediate red flags, but so are questions that begin with
>"X is crap, why can't I do ..." and even seemingly polite questions
>that are vague or unfocused (possibly indicating little or no thought
>behind them) or posts which are directed to a large number of groups
>(such as this thread we're in now).  
>
>And, of course, in the language forums, drawing comparisons to
>non-subject languages is generally considered rude except when done to
>illustrate a relevant discussion point.  Introducing irrelevant
>comparisons, deliberately proselytizing X in a Y group or doing a lot
>of complaining about the subject language is bound to attract disdain.
>
>As the Internet has grown, the absolute number of people in that
>"small percentage" has grown as well.  A newbie can simply be unlucky
>enough to ask a question at the wrong time.  If there has been a
>recent rash of problem posts then experts may accidentally respond
>negatively to a legitimate question.
>
>Of course, there are cross-cultural issues too.  Many of the technical
>groups are English-language.  English, even when polite, can seem
>harsh and/or abrupt to non-native speakers.
>
>On the whole, moderated groups are more conducive to helping newbies
>because the moderator(s) filter obvious red flag posts.
>
>And, finally, newbies themselves should realize that experts are
>donating time to answer questions and do get frustrated answering the
>same questions over and over.  They should not be offended by "cold"
>responses that direct them to FAQs or that just give links to study
>material.  Newbies who need hand-holding or warm welcoming responses
>filled with detail should go find a tutor.
>
>
>> ... you have the bad "professors" who are freaks 
>>(probably they have a lot of problems at home, their wives 
>>screwing all the males on the block, daughters drug addicts etc) 
>>and want to take their hatred out on you,
>
>Unquestionably, there are experts who need their dosages adjusted. But
>the same can be said for some percentage of other users too.
>
>OTOH, newbies often aren't in the position to know who is an expert
>... obviously, anyone able to correctly answer their question knows
>more about that specific issue.  That doesn't necessarily qualify the
>responder as an "expert".  Some people get defensive at the edges of
>their comfort zones.
>
>
>Just some thoughts. YMMV.
>George

Yes I agree, you expressed the thought better than I did. Then let's not go on 
with this thread any further and let the newsgroups carry on programming 
language support and discussions. Thanks

Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python

[bolega]

On Jul 13, 11:35 pm, Paul Rubin <no.em...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> bolega <gnuist...@gmail.com> writes:
> > I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness...
> > Are there already answers anywhere ?
> > How would a gury approach such a project ?
>
> These two articles
>
>    http://page.mi.fu-berlin.de/~prechelt/Biblio/jccpprt_computer2000.pdf
>    http://www.haskell.org/papers/NSWC/jfp.ps
>
> about language comparisons (Python is in the first but not the second)
> might be of interest.
>
> If you want to know how to implement C, there is a pretty good book by
> Hanson and Fraser about LCC, called "A Retargetable C Compiler".
> Basically a code walkthrough of a small C compiler written in C.

I have decided to limit my goal to tyni LISP interpreter in C because
its a smaller and simpler language.