janet VS moodycamel

Seems like a perfect use-case for Janet. (https://janet-lang.org/) A fast minimal VM like Lua, but even more extensible than Lua by being a "Lisp" with macro and C extension capabilities. Not a true Lisp, it's very pragmatic and performance-oriented. But it keeps the good stuff.

You might be looking for: https://janet-lang.org/

It comes with a build tool `jpm` which installs dependencies globally by default, but you can have it be installed in your project folder as well.

I like Clojure, but I never had any good opportunities to use it other than for a few small hobby projects. It is unfortunate that it is so huge with tons of dependencies and no simpler native implementation. I started looking at various LISPs and Schemes to find something lighter to use instead and ended up settling for Janet that I think is Clojure-like enough to be comfortable to use, but in a small native binary with no dependencies and can be embedded in other native programs. I am sure for big, real, projects that Clojure makes more sense, but for my hobby projects and scripts I do not think I will install it again. I am still happy for the things I learned from learning Clojure. It was a real eye-opener for an old OO-programmer.

https://janet-lang.org/

One might also check out Janet for quick scripting tasks.

https://janet-lang.org

Thanks!

I thought about another multiplatform, homoiconic, highly compact language: https://janet-lang.org/ (takes 803 kb on my machine).

It has no types though.

Racket is great, and if you like it you might find Rash interesting:

https://rash-lang.org/

Janet and Gerbil Scheme are also worth a look:

https://janet-lang.org/

https://cons.io/

Point here is that, for instance Janet language does not have cons / pair type but tuple (and so is lispoid, not lisp), but clearly this is sufficient for macros & hence seamless language construction: all you need is to be a lispoid although being a lisp gives another useful feature.

Other than that... if your stuff is good, that's a much better signal than a professional username. I've seen a lot of decently unprofessional usernames out there that get taken pretty seriously because of the good work behind them. My recent favorite is "moodycamel" who authored a great concurrent queue library in C++.

In c++ the moodycamel ConcurrentQueue is a good choice.

Here's a decent concurrent queue: moodycamel::ConcurrentQueue.

Lock free programming is hard, and probably harder than you think. I would not even try something like that myself. I would look for existing solutions, something like https://github.com/cameron314/concurrentqueue for example.

I needed a concurrent queue that would block when attempting to pop an empty queue, which allows the consuming thread to suspend while it's waiting for work. I found that using mutexes allowed me to develop a simple template adapter had several advantages with few drawbacks when compared to non-blocking queues: it can use a variety of containers, the code can be reviewed and verified as to its correctness (very hard to do with fancy concurrent programming that avoids mutexes), and it is only slightly slower than fancier solutions (when I benchmarked it originally, it was 4x slower than Moody Camel's concurrent queue, which to me is fine performance).

Not literatue but an example. This is a lock-free (not wait-free!) multi-producer multi-consumer queue, not a FIFO, but access patterns should be similar - if not the same: https://github.com/cameron314/concurrentqueue

If I do implement it, the most likely route I'd take is make a compiler in Clojure/clojurescript that uses Instaparse (I have a more-or-less-clojure grammar written that I was tinkering with) and generate C++ code that uses Immer for its data structures and Zug for transducers and what my not-quite-clojure would support would be heavily dependent on what the C++ code and libraries I use can do. I'd use Taskflow to implement a core.async style system (not sure how to implement channels, maybe this but I'm unsure if its a good fit, but I also haven't looked). I would ultimately want to be able to interact with C++ code, so having some way to call C++ classes (even templated ones) would be a must. I'm unsure if I would just copy (and extend as needed) Clojure's host interop functionality or not. I had toyed with the idea that you can define the native types (including templates) as part of the type annotations and then the user-level code basically just looks like a normal function. But I didn't take it very far yet, haven't had the time. The reason I'd take this approach is that I'm writing a good bit of C++ again and I'd love to do that in this not-quite-clojure language, if I did make it. A bunch of languages, like Haxe and Nim compile to C or C++, so I think its a perfectly reasonable approach, and if interop works well enough, then just like Clojure was able to leverage the Java ecosystem, not-quite-clojure could be bootstrapped by leveraging the C++ ecosystem. But its mostly just a vague dream right now.

I would recommend https://github.com/cameron314/concurrentqueue as it's very battle tested and fast.

This was explicitly considered for spdlog (using the moodycamel::ConcurrentQueue) but rejected for the above reason. I'm not involved in the development of spdlog but personally I agree, for me it's important that log output is not all mixed up.