I'm a total Lisp noob (and a very rusty programmer), but from OO (Java, et
al) there is (behind the scenes, i.e., preprocessor) name mangling. There's
also tagging stuff with a huge hash generated numbers. I say all this
because I'm hearing the need for uniqueness and anti-name-clash -- across
file
Hi list> Could we cook up a convention?Pretext-In this context I assume "modules" is meant not in the sense of program design but in the sense of "software packages", a format to download/copy a piece of picoLisp code (maybe accompanied by other files, e.g. pictures) and insert it into your
Could we cook up a convention?
On February 9, 2015 6:12:17 PM CET, Henrik Sarvell wrote:
>Hi Lawrence, if you're talking about something like Ruby's gems, then
>no.
>
>On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Lawrence Bottorff
>wrote:
>
>> I'm wondering what you offer in lieu of modules (as with, say,
>
Hi Lawrence, if you're talking about something like Ruby's gems, then no.
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Lawrence Bottorff wrote:
> I'm wondering what you offer in lieu of modules (as with, say, Python). Is
> there a "black box" way to "package up" code in picoLisp that has
> module-like servic
Hi Lawrence,
> I'm wondering what you offer in lieu of modules (as with, say, Python). Is
> there a "black box" way to "package up" code in picoLisp that has
> module-like serviceability?
I would say no, though I don't know the modules of Python.
Similar to C, a source file has certain encapsula
I'm wondering what you offer in lieu of modules (as with, say, Python). Is
there a "black box" way to "package up" code in picoLisp that has
module-like serviceability?
LB
For what it is worth, here are the contents of every file named 'pil' in the
3.1.9 tarball.
hobbes@metalbaby:~/src/pil319/picoLisp$ find . -name pil -exec head -1000 {} +
==> ./bin/pil <==
#!/usr/bin/picolisp /usr/lib/picolisp/lib.l
(load "@lib/misc.l" "@lib/btree.l" "@lib/db.l" "@lib/pilog.l")
