cl-sdl2 VS processing

I can build it in C with sdl2-config, or use cl-sdl2 with SBCL by following some steps I found online to fix macbook m1 quirks (see below), but I’m trying to load it from an ECL repl- not really knowledgeable enough about where sdl2-config would be used in that situation.

https://github.com/lispgames/cl-sdl2/issues/154#issuecomment...

Have you considered using SDL2 wrappers? e.g. cl-sdl2. It works on Windows and Linux, amongst other platforms.

You can write SDL2 cffi interface files by hand but any package dependent on https://github.com/lispgames/cl-sdl2/ is going to be blocked by this on Windows.

I dunno, my Lisp code comes back in pretty frequently, but I'm defining new functions, using CLOS, making use of let* or other nifty macros (uiop:nest is occasionally useful), and refactoring when a function gets too large. But compared to horrors I've frequently seen in JavaLand (especially in older code when the more modern practice of extract function refactoring was less common, more laborious, and not really automated), tons of Lisp code I come across from others has been pretty sane as far as indentation and spacing goes.

It seems like a problem mostly handled by style, just because you can easily represent the whole expanded AST in one function definition doesn't mean you should. And sure there are plenty of (in my opinion) not so great examples out there, like it's rather unfortunate that this is the first example for the cl-sdl2 project: https://github.com/lispgames/cl-sdl2/blob/main/examples/basi... (Though on another metric, the longest line is only 96 characters; most of my lines happen to be under 80 but I don't hold myself to that limit, my screen and editor windows support wide lines by default, like >200 characters wide.) The huge nest of with-macros further impedes runtime redefinition and modification, because now sure you can change code and redefine the function, but your game loop isn't going to see any of that on further iterations. At least the other renderer.lisp example is moving in a better direction splitting the game loop up into several draw functions, and you see those have a normal pattern of going out and then back in.

Urbit docs for its language Hoon once called the phenomenon something like "attacking the right margin". I recalled this fosdem paper describing it more https://archive.fosdem.org/2018/schedule/event/urbit/attachm... especially in 6.3.2:

> There are two common syntactic problems in functional languages: closing terminator piles (eg, right parens in Lisp) and indentation creep. A complex function will have a deep AST; if every child node in that AST is indented past its parent, any interesting code tends to creep toward the right margin. To solve terminator piles, there are two forms of every Hoon twig: “tall” and “flat”, ie, multiline and single-line. Tall twigs can contain flat twigs, but not vice versa, mimicking the look of “statements” and “expressions” in an imperative language. Flat form is enclosed by parentheses and separated by a single space; tall form is separated by multiple spaces or a newline, and (in most cases) not enclosed at all. ...

> Right-margin creep is prevented by backstep indentation; where a classical

First thing, I followed the instructions here: https://github.com/lispgames/cl-sdl2/issues/154

Use CL-SDL2 (https://github.com/lispgames/cl-sdl2) for simple 2d rendering. It's both GPU-accelerated and portable to many platforms. You can use CL-SDL2 along with CL-OPENGL (https://github.com/3b/cl-opengl) for OpenGL programming, provided you have knowledges about 2d/3d graphics programming.

reply

I disagree. There are so many creative tools that are now online that you can access from your browser that were not envisioned in the original web. It is obviously true that not EVERY website is about creation (but to expect that seems unreasonable?), but even Wikipedia is a collaborative project.

Examples include products from big vendors like Adobe's Photoshop, to smaller products like SketchUp, to more indy generative art tools like https://processing.org and Strudel (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39924210).

Would processing[0] be a good fit? It's designed to be easy to use and learn but powerful enough for professional use. Very quick to get cool stuff moving on a screen and the syntax is Java with a streamlined editing environment.

[0] https://processing.org/

I would personally use the language Processing. It's the one I use the most. And it's relatively easy to start drawing text, squares, and do other kinds of things. (It's kind of like java, but without all the boilerplate code)

Processing (P5) had this: you can select any string of text in its IDE anl search for it in the docs, and if it's one of the built-in functions or constants it will open the associated static html page that came installed with the software, so no internet nor server required. And despite being offline you can still navigate the docs too. This feels a lost basic skill in static site generation these days.

It was the only creative coding framework that had complete, offline documentation like that at the time I might add. OpenFrameworks is still mostly autogenerated stubs for example.

IMO it was one of the things that gave Processing an edge in educational contexts over all alternatives. I was pretty sad to see p5.js not fully continue that tradition and require that you go online to read the docs, and that it's not a static website but that text is rendered with javascript when you open it (still complete and with examples though).

https://processing.org/

https://p5js.org/

Processing is very cool, especially if you like graphics.

https://processing.org/

Processing is a flexible software sketchbook and a language for learning how to code. Since 2001, Processing has promoted software literacy within the visual arts and visual literacy within technology. There are tens of thousands of students, artists, designers, researchers, and hobbyists who use Processing for learning and prototyping.

And it's not even their IDE. They just slapped some AVR compilers into Processing

https://processing.org/