Is it better to use eLISP or Common LISP?

Is it better to use eLISP or Common LISP?

[Dan Anderson]

I am thinking of hacking some LISP for a project manager.  I know that I
can either use Emacs LISP or the eLISP file that interfaces with common
LISP.  Since I'd be learning LISP for the first time, what would be best
to do?  Also, are there any reasons why?

-Dan

Re: Is it better to use eLISP or Common LISP?

[Sam Steingold]

> * Dan Anderson <qna@znguwhaxvrf.pbz> [2003-10-20 14:22:43 -0400]:
>
> I am thinking of hacking some LISP for a project manager.  I know that I
> can either use Emacs LISP or the eLISP file that interfaces with common
> LISP.  Since I'd be learning LISP for the first time, what would be best
> to do?  Also, are there any reasons why?

The choice is between "Emacs-Lisp" and "Common Lisp".

I recommend Common Lisp.

Emacs-Lisp is a largely obsolete dialect, defined by its unique
implementations (Emacs & XEmacs stem from the same codebase), unsuitable
for large projects (even though many large projects indeed have been
done in it!)

Common Lisp is a modern standard language (actually, it was the first OO
language to receive an ANSI standard) with several high quality
implementations.

details: <http://www.podval.org/~sds/tool.html>

-- 
Sam Steingold (http://www.podval.org/~sds) running w2k
<http://www.camera.org> <http://www.iris.org.il> <http://www.memri.org/>
<http://www.mideasttruth.com/> <http://www.honestreporting.com>
MS Windows: error: the operation completed successfully.

Re: Is it better to use eLISP or Common LISP?

[Phillip Lord]

>>>>> "Sam" == Sam Steingold <sds@gnu.org> writes:

  >> * Dan Anderson <qna@znguwhaxvrf.pbz> [2003-10-20 14:22:43 -0400]:
  >>
  >> I am thinking of hacking some LISP for a project manager.[...]  Since
  >> I'd be learning LISP for the first time, what would be best to
  >> do?  Also, are there any reasons why?

  Sam> The choice is between "Emacs-Lisp" and "Common Lisp".

  Sam> I recommend Common Lisp.

  Sam> Emacs-Lisp is a largely obsolete dialect, 

  Sam> Common Lisp is a modern standard language 

If you want to learn a lisp, then Common Lisp would probably be the
better choice. 

If you want to modify the behaviour of Emacs, then Emacs Lisp would be
the better choice. 

  >> I know that I can either use Emacs LISP or the eLISP file that
  >> interfaces with common LISP.

I don't know what this means. What "elisp file that interfaces with
common lisp". If you want emacs to do things, then you can use emacs
lisp, or emacs lisp. 

Phil

Re: Is it better to use eLISP or Common LISP?

[Dan Anderson]

>   >> I know that I can either use Emacs LISP or the eLISP file that
>   >> interfaces with common LISP.
> 
> I don't know what this means. What "elisp file that interfaces with
> common lisp". If you want emacs to do things, then you can use emacs
> lisp, or emacs lisp. 

I think I found an emacs lisp file that allows you to extend emacs using
common lisp.  Perhaps I was reading the manifest wrong.

-Dan

Re: Is it better to use eLISP or Common LISP?

[Phillip Lord]

>>>>> "Dan" == Dan Anderson <dan@mathjunkies.com> writes:

  >> >> I know that I can either use Emacs LISP or the eLISP file that
  >> >> interfaces with common LISP.
  >>
  >> I don't know what this means. What "elisp file that interfaces
  >> with common lisp". If you want emacs to do things, then you can
  >> use emacs lisp, or emacs lisp.

  Dan> I think I found an emacs lisp file that allows you to extend
  Dan> emacs using common lisp.  Perhaps I was reading the manifest
  Dan> wrong.


There is the "CL" packages within Emacs. This is written in Emacs
Lisp, but provides a set of functions which are found in Common Lisp
as well. 

If you want to use the CL packages, then there is no problem with
this. Many people do use these packages. But they are an
implementation of some of CL. They are not CL. If you read a book on
CL, and then try is on Emacs, even using the CL code, its not going to
work. 

Likewise you can look at EIEIO, which is Eric Ludlum's implementation
of a CLOS-u-like object system for emacs lisp. But its not CLOS.

If you want to write Emacs lisp add on's, then its Emacs Lisp you
should learn. I would suggest that you start off with this...

http://www.gnu.org/manual/emacs-lisp-intro/emacs-lisp-intro.html

If you get the .info files, you can read it as hypertext within Emacs,
and it has the advantage that the example source code in the book, is
actually directly runnable within Emacs. It's a good
introduction. Next I'd start to read the Emacs Lisp Manual. Its a bit
heavier weight, and you want to be familiar with Emacs Lisp, and Emacs
usage before you read it. The CL stuff is good to read, at about the
same time, as there are lots of useful utility functions. 

Phil

Re: Is it better to use eLISP or Common LISP?

[Tim X]

>>>>> "Dan" == Dan Anderson <dan@mathjunkies.com> writes:

 >> >> I know that I can either use Emacs LISP or the eLISP file that
 >> >> interfaces with common LISP.
 >> 
 >> I don't know what this means. What "elisp file that interfaces
 >> with common lisp". If you want emacs to do things, then you can
 >> use emacs lisp, or emacs lisp.

 Dan> I think I found an emacs lisp file that allows you to extend
 Dan> emacs using common lisp.  Perhaps I was reading the manifest
 Dan> wrong.

You may be thinking about the cl package which adds many common lisp
features to emacs lisp, such as 'declaim, proclaim etc'. It is
documented in its own info pages under CL.

Tim





-- 
Tim Cross
The e-mail address on this message is FALSE (obviously!). My real e-mail is
to a company in Australia called rapttech and my login is tcross - if you 
really need to send mail, you should be able to work it out!