There are plenty of free implementations of Lisp language in Pascal, Modula 2/3, Oberon out there.
E.g. https://github.com/bobappleyard/pascal-lisp/blob/master/README But all that makes no real sense. Lisp, as functional language, should better be implemented in a functional language, such as Haskell or OCaml: https://bernsteinbear.com/blog/lisp/00_fundamentals/ At the moment, we are working on a Linux (POSIX) Clone in OCaml (European!!!). That has started with MirageOS, http://mirage.io (European!!!) All i can say is, that by moving everything to OCaml (as Operating System and Cloud Application Server), (overall) memory footprint now is reduced by a factor of 25 and speed went up factor 10. Network latencey went tremendously down, thanks to a TCP/IP Stack implementation in OCaml. Worth mentioning: Microsoft's F# is a 98% OCaml Clone. Ridiculous! Picolisp runs on MirageOS ... Funny thing that is: Linux (UNIX) now is just a (OCaml written) library. When compiling PicoLisp from C sources, you have to #include that library. So, PicoLisp now directly is sitting on top of a Hypervisor, an "EXO Kernel". Much faster than on Linux. Hardware requirements, 800 servers with conventional "US Software Stacks" (mostly Linux) have come down to 17. That was an eye-opener for me. Have fun! Best regards, Guido Stepken Am Mittwoch, 6. Mai 2020 schrieb George-Phillip Orais < orais.georgephil...@gmail.com>: > Hi Guido, > Want to hear your thoughts about, what if PicoLisp is implemented in Pascal or Modula or Oberon? Will it be cool or not? > > BR, > Geo > On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 2:46 PM Guido Stepken <gstep...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> In international law, signing such a contract, as Anaconda Eula is called "self binding". Those ideas in law go back to John Locke, Francis Bacon, Thomas Hobbes. >> >> British and American law differ between binding contracts and common law. But in those countries, signing such a contract binds you to their legal system. Something, what over a long period was disputed about in the European Union and that finally led to Brexit. >> >> http://www.contractsandagreements.co.uk/legally-binding-contracts.html >> >> Means: Sign that and you're going to Guantanamo, if you sent a copy of Anaconda Python Packages to Iran. You get an international warrant. See Assange, Australian. See Meng Wanzhou, Chinese. >> >> But all US export control laws can be overridden by the US president, by US trade department, US Department of Justice, any time they want. >> >> https://www.eff.org/cases/bernstein-v-us-dept-justice >> >> Means, you can never know, if something is legal under US (and British) law when using US "legally owned" (e.g. by Apache Foundation, Linux Foundation, LLVM foundation) Open Source software ... or not, even if it's under a "free license". And even if you haven't signed the Anaconda EULA. Just by using free packages (e.g. with Python pip installer) that are listed in Anaconda, gets you into conflict with US DoJ. >> >> But too many programmers proudly handed over their software to famous US foundations without knowing, that - from now on - their code falls under US law, US export restictions. >> >> Again i only can repeat: "Keep away from US Software Stacks!" >> >> Best regards, Guido Stepken >> >> Am Mittwoch, 6. Mai 2020 schrieb <andr...@itship.ch>: >> > Hi Guido >> > >> > Anaconda is a well known, free Software Installer for Python and R packages, mostly used under Windows, right? >> > >> > And you think, that "free software" packages cannot be restricted by US ministry of trade or U.S. president, such as happened in Huawei Google case, right? Plain wrong: >> > >> > Quote from: https://docs.anaconda.com/anaconda-repository/2.23/admin/eula/ >> > >> > Are you sure you are not just mixing up "Enterprise Edition" and the FOSS variant ("Individual Edition") ? >> > To me it looks like the FOSS Anaconda is BSD-licensed, which comes without any additional EULA or other strings attached. >> > The EULA you link to belongs obviously to the proprietary product (the classic "open-core" software business model). >> > >> > Additionally I like to add that throwing picolisp database together with "distributed databases like datomic" into the same category is misleading, this is hardly the same bucket. PicoLisp database can certainly be used to build distributed systems, including a datomic-like DBMS, but picolisp database is certainly not a "plug & play" distributed database system in the current mainstream sense. There distributed DBMS essentially means individual servers are abstracted away for the programmer, be it 3 or 3000 servers doesn't make a difference for the programmer using the DBMS - of course this abstracting on top of networking (which is unreliable) comes with constraints (e.g. usually no ACID) and a ton of potential issues (some better, some often not so much mitigated by common distributed DBMS software). This doesn't apply to PicoLisp database, which offers strict ACID transactions and gives strong consistency guarantees even when "distributed" (following C+P of CAP, while "datomic" follows A+P). PicoLisp database allows to easily deploy read-replicas and remote databases can be easily integrated into an single instance (including into the indexing system), but it doesn't give you multi master mechanics out of the box without basically re-implementing datomic or a similar architecture on top of it. >> > >> > Your understanding of both distributed databases and PicoLisp (including the non-DB areas) seem rather superficial to me. >> > >> > And it does not fall under US restrictions, since PicoLisp is <MADE IN GERMANY> and does not contain any US libraries, that might fall under those US export laws. >> > >> > What makes you think that Germany will not introduce similar laws sooner or later? >> > >> > Germany already has the "Hacker-paragraph" which arguably criminalizes distribution of the 'ping' network tool. Germany's "hate-speech" law was copied by a number of repressive states, a perfect template. And currently politicians debate about forcing websites to hand over password hashes to the government. Granted these laws are probably not widely applied in practice - but worse - this way they degenerate into tools of arbitrariness, which stands in direct opposition to democratic rule of law. >> > >> > It's not so easy, >> > - beneroth >> > >> > On 05.05.20 21:40, Guido Stepken wrote: >> > >> > Interesting question, isn't it? Let's have a look into my findings! >> > >> > Anaconda is a well known, free Software Installer for Python and R packages, mostly used under Windows, right? >> > >> > And you think, that "free software" packages cannot be restricted by US ministry of trade or U.S. president, such as happened in Huawei Google case, right? Plain wrong: >> > >> > Quote from: https://docs.anaconda.com/anaconda-repository/223/admin/eula/ >> > >> > [quote] >> > Export regulations >> > >> > Any use or distribution of the Software Product is made under conditions that the user and/or distributor is in full compliance with all export and other governing laws of the United States of America, including full and ongoing compliance with the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) of the United States Department of Commerce. See www.commerce.gov/ and http://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/regulations/export-administration-regulations-ear. Use or distribution of Continuum software products to any persons, entities or countries currently under US sanctions is strictly prohibited. Continuum has self-assessed that Anaconda Repository requires no license to for export to non-embargoed countries >> > >> > The United States currently has embargoes against several countries. The exportation, re-exportation, sale or supply, directly or indirectly, from the United States, or by a U.S. person wherever located, of any Continuum software to any of these countries is strictly prohibited without prior authorization by the United States Government. By accepting this Agreement, you represent to Continuum that you will comply with all applicable export regulations for Anaconda. >> > [/quote] >> > >> > Means: Export Anaconda or packages from Anaconda to Iran and you're going to Guantanamo! >> > >> > And i repeat: *****Stop using US Software Stacks!***** >> > >> > Picoslip has everything, yor IT could ever need! Integrated Distributed Database, Prolog like reasoning about stored data and even contains a Graph Database, though it's mentioned nowhere. >> > >> > But there is no real need to mention that, since Lisp in itself ("Code is data, data is code") not only has a "syntax tree" (kind of graph), but, in fact, you can model any graph you like with Lisp's (cons) constructs. >> > >> > And it does not fall under US restrictions, since PicoLisp is <MADE IN GERMANY> and does not contain any US libraries, that might fall under those US export laws. >> > >> > Have fun! >> >
