[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/g/ - Technology

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


What is the modern day equivalent of a lisp machine? is it Emacs?
>>
A Lisp machine
>>
Emacs is a lisp machine, yes.
>>
>>83814858
Pharo, probably.
>>
>>83814895
are there any usable ones?
>>83815066
with what packages would Emacs be the closest to a real lisp machine?
>>
>>83815066
by definition, it isn't. it doesn't even run on the bare metal and has to rely on a c interpreter.

the interface alone has nothing to do with them, at all. lisp machine oses such as genera were very mouse-oriented, with more sophisticated guis. emacs, while it does support the mouse in gui mode, is still primarily keyboard-oriented and its interface is still mostly text-based.

gnu emacs is a fine piece of software and arguably the best general-purpose text editor ever made, but it has nothing to do with lisp machines whatsoever. the only similarity is being (mostly) written in lisp.
>>
>>83815234
LispWorks is probably the closest thing, but it's $$$.
>>83815225
Pharo is very lisp-like (simple core language that's implemented in itself), but it lacks macros, and tail-call elimination.
But it has an entire graphical environment where the code, data, and runtime processes all coexist in a unified "image," which is similar to the lisp machines of the 80s.
>>
>>83814858
What is Lisp Machine even?
Is it some kind of kernel or only userspace?

I am retard, so pls no bully
>>
>>83815433
>Is it some kind of kernel or only userspace?
Both, along with custom hardware (including the CPU) optimized for lisp.
However the Lisp "programs" often ran in a shared address space.
>>
>>83815503
that's interesting
Is there a way for something like that to come back?
i.e. Single Board Lisp Machine made like Raspberry Pi.
>>
>>83815586
that'd be cool
>>
>>83815234
>with what packages would Emacs be the closest to a real lisp machine?
common lisp package for elisp (includes most of common lisp), + slime

>>83815256
>it doesn't even run on the bare metal and has to rely on a c interpreter.
Many Lisp machines didn't run on the bare metal and used a c interpreter, like Symbolics Genera LISP eventually did. And Lisp machines used a variety of UIs, most of which were broadly similar because they had a common lineage for the most part. Emacs was designed to run on a terminal initially but you're free to make any elisp program act as pointy clicky as anything if you like these days.

You don't know what you're even talking about.
>>
>>83815256
why the fuck did they think mouse oriented os would be a great idea?
>>
>>83815696
This was back in the day where all the manufacturers were trying to get their so-called 3M machines into the market. Before that everybody pretty much ran Lisp in a terminal. Nowadays the Lisp market is split, about half the Lisp developers use emacs, and half use a variety of other Lisps both open and proprietary some of which have a GUI similar to later Lisp machines.

Eventually the 3M machines which won in the market were Unix boxes and the Mac. Lisp (and Smalltalk) were way too slow or expensive or both back then for general use.
>>
>>83815696
t. never used plan 9
The mouse is based
>>
>>83815848
i actually have and keyboard shortcuts are always better
>>
>>83815669
>Many Lisp machines didn't run on the bare metal
nigga what? all of the lisp machines ran on bare metal. the symbolics vlm was a late-stage thing after their second bankruptcy when they were down to a handful of employees and no way to make silicon anymore, and nobody considers that a "lisp machine" anymore than anybody considers vba to be "a gameboy"
>>
>>83815586
>Is there a way for something like that to come back?
you don't want it to come back. lispms were utterly mogged by off the shelf CPUs. the original lisp machine rational was simply that lisp programs trying to do serious AI (for the time) needed more memory than was reasonably available on minicomputers of the era. the early lisp machine had a larger address space, and had special hardware to do something called cdr-coding, where the elements of a linked list would be stored contiguously like a vector, and there was a flag on each element that indicated if the next item in the list was at the next memory word or if the next memory word actually contained the address of the next list item. it was believed that this optimization, when performed during garbage collection, would greatly reduce the amount of memory needed. Unfortunately, by the time these early machines were working the lisp they were running had been beefed up with things like arrays and hash tables and it turned out that cdr-coding only saved something like 1.5% memory. meanwhile the DEC VAX came out with its 32-bit address space and the lispm rationale had mostly evaporated, except that they didn't realize it yet.

lispm performance running lisp was always very poor compared to conventional hardware running lisp, by the end it turned out the vlm emulator could emulate a lispm something like 10x faster than the latest and greatest lispm could run it natively. and things have only gotten worse for the lispm idea since then.
>>
>>83816934
>all of the lisp machines ran on bare metal
Actually the environments were made on other computers then later bare metal implementations were created then later later they all migrated to using an emulator or a shim to run the entire environment on an OS and these lisp machines became applications

stallman was way ahead of his time in this respect, he was making a portable lisp machine way back in 1985, years before Symbolics ended up doing the same thing with Open Genera.
>>
>>83815696
>mouse bad!
>>
>>83814858
>equivalent of a Lisp machine
not exactly "modern day" but there are ARM architectures that can directly interpret java bytecode, like ARMv5TEJ
>>
>>83817620
you're a fucking retard aren't you? the first lisp machines were the MIT CADR and Xerox Alto. both of them were real live hardware machines. the lisp systems before that were not "lisp machines" and had nothing resembling the environments that were developed on the lisp machines. the lisp environments like allegro and lispworks that followed the lisp machines were also not "lisp machines". one can make an argument that symbolics vlm was a lisp machine *emulator* in that it was more-or-less an emulator for the last gen symbolics machines.
>>
>>83817620
>he was making a portable lisp machine way back in 1985
gnu emacs may be portable, but it isn't a lisp machine. and secondly, large swathes of it were swiped from an older - also portable - implementation of emacs by James Gosling (later of Java fame).
>>
>>83819469
>large swathes of it were swiped from an older - also portable - implementation of emacs by James Gosling
The more I learn about Stallman the less I respect him. All he seems to do is complain about legal bullshit until he's allowed to take other people's work then complain about how he deserves their credit.
It's not Linux, it's GNU/Linux. And GNU is totally not Unix even though it is. I-I made it all up myself. Well I mean I implemented it myself and the idea might have come from someone else, but look Linux isn't important, GNU is.
>>
Emacs
Modern Smalltalk implementations
JVM
Urbit
>>
>>83819469
Gosling Emacs did not even use a real Lisp, it used Mocklisp.
This FUD about Stallman supposedly "stealing" Emacs started spreading right after he was forced to resign after the Epstein fiasco, even though it has always been bullshit.
This is all made more amusing considering that Stallman worked on the very original TECO Emacs.

>>83820086
Idiot.
>>
>>83815696
The mouse is based. This obsession with getting rid of it and only using the keyboard is a quite recent phenomenon, greatly exacerbated by autists on /r/unixporn and similar communities.

If you look at past OSes, literally every interface took advantage of the mouse, even Plan 9, which was made by many of the authors of the original system everyone here worships, Unix.

No, the mouse is not a b4sedboy recent craze. In fact, the keyboard-only obsession is.
>>
>>83815669
>Many Lisp machines didn't run on the bare metal
Lisp machines are, by definition, physical machines running a Lisp-based system, potentially with an architecture that facilitates the execution of Lisp instructions.

What you said doesn't make sense in the slightest.
>>
>>83821790
Later the lisp machine became a c program running the lisp that was in the lisp machine. That's what the last true lisp machine with a lisp machine lineage, OpenGenera became.

Stallman wrote a C platform for a lisp machine in emacs. It too is a lisp machine.
>>
>>83819456
>the first lisp machines were the MIT CADR and Xerox Alto. both of them were real live hardware machines.
Their environments were brought up on other machines and descend from earlier lisps that ran on big fancy computers.
>>
>>83820086
Richard Stallman was on the POSIX committee. He helped to define what the standard Unix environment was.
>>
>>83821934
Not only that. He literally came up with the term "POSIX" itself.

Wanna know why? It was precisely to avoid having people call POSIX systems just "Unix".
Further proof how "GNU's Not Unix" has a much deeper meaning and was never just a way to avoid lawsuits.

See https://stallman.org/articles/posix.html

>In the 1980s I was in the IEEE committee that wrote the standard that ultimately became known as POSIX. The committee set itself the task of standardizing interface specs for a Unix-like system, but had no short name for its work. When the first part of the specification was ready, someone gave it the name "IEEEIX", with a subtitle that included "Portable Operating System" — perhaps "Specifications for a Portable Operating System".

>It seemed to me that nobody would ever say "IEEEIX", since the pronunciation would sound like a shriek of terror; rather, everyone would call it "Unix". That would have boosted AT&T, the GNU Project's rival, an outcome I did not want. So I looked for another name, but nothing natural suggested itself to me.

>So I put the initials of "Portable Operating System" together with the same suffix "ix", and came up with "POSIX". It sounded good and I saw no reason not to use it, so I suggested it. Although it was just barely in time, the committee adopted it.

>I think the administrators of the committee were as relieved as I was to give the standard a pronounceable name.

>Copyright (c) 2011 Richard Stallman Verbatim copying and redistribution of this entire page are permitted provided this notice is preserved.
>>
>>83821934
I thought he just came up with the name?
>>
>>83821927
Yes, and those fancy computers weren't Lisp machines. Lisp system =/= Lisp machine.
>>
File: 1624667255927.gif (358 KB, 500x357)
358 KB
358 KB GIF
>>83821977
>>It seemed to me that nobody would ever say "IEEEIX", since the pronunciation would sound like a shriek of terror
>>
>>83821981
A lisp machine is now an emulator or shim. But the CONS and CADR were brought up with different machines of course. In fact I believe every Lisp machine was brought up on a more normal computer.
>>
>>83822059
>A lisp machine is now...
No it's not. Lisp machines have always been, by definition, physical machines running Lisp systems with architectures geared towards executing Lisp. Any other definition is mental gymnastics.
>>
>>83822071
Nope, it's like the Super Nintendo. First it was a board inside an Apple IIgs, then it was a Super Nintendo, now it's an emulator.
>>
File: m.png (7 KB, 707x707)
7 KB
7 KB PNG
>>83817851
>>
oh, youre talking about pharo and not squeak or mice :c
>>
>>83820086
stallman is a fucking pedo or a weirdo



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.