klisp | letlang | |
---|---|---|
2 | 12 | |
0 | 157 | |
- | - | |
10.0 | 7.9 | |
almost 5 years ago | 4 months ago | |
Rust | ||
GNU General Public License v3.0 or later | MIT License |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
klisp
-
Generalized Macros
klisp is the most complete implementation I've used. Website is now down and original bitbucket host too, but mirror here: https://github.com/dbohdan/klisp/tree/master/doc/src
Performance-wise, there's bronze-age-lisp, which uses klisp and x86 assembly.
-
Syntax for defining algebraic data types
If you want to try running it, I recommend klisp, which is the most complete implementation. This is easy to build on linux and has few dependencies.
letlang
-
Letlang — Roadblocks and how to overcome them - My programming language targeting Rust
That works for any types (except the functional types), and even the generic ones. During code generation, I create structs that implement the Type trait.
-
A new milestone for Letlang (targeting Rust) - Effect Handlers
As stated on the website ( https://letlang.dev ), Letlang is a general-purpose language.
-
Writing a simple Lisp interpreter in Rust
Author here, the article is more about how Rust and its ecosystem are nice tools for language designers rather than the beauty of Lisp.
The crates listed in that article are the ones I use for my compiler: https://letlang.dev
Lisp was only chosen as a way to demonstrate the power of those crates and Rust features. A kind of way of justifying my choices for Letlang.
It's not "you should do it like this" but "you can do it like this".
-
Ask HN: Possible? Faster than C, simpler than Python, safer than Rust
"Faster than C", I saw people write C code slower than a Python equivalent. So I have to admit, I don't know what it means for a language to be fast, because it depends on the algorithm being implemented.
---
"simpler than Python", what does "simple" mean?
Simple design? Python's design is very complex (take a look at "Crimes with Python's pattern matching" < https://www.hillelwayne.com/post/python-abc/ > for example), on the other hand, assembly languages, or Lisp, or Forth, have a very simple design.
Simple as in "easy to use"? Rust is easy, write code, fix what the compiler tells you you did wrong. Joke aside, Go is quite easy to use and while I personally don't like this language, I get why it replaced Python in a lot of use cases.
Also, once you get used to the OTP framework, Erlang/Elixir/Gleam/any beam language are quite easy to use and have less footguns than Python.
---
"safer than Rust" is too vague. Is it memory safety? type safety? thread safety? cosmic ray safety? A mix of all of that?
Let's guess you meant "memory safety". All languages with a Garbage Collector are "memory safe".
---
On a semi-unrelated note, I've been working on https://letlang.dev
It's a language inspired by Erlang/Elixir (same concurrency model) that compiles to Rust code (the runtime use tokio). It is immutable, have no Garbage Collector thanks to Rust semantics, and dynamically typed.
I haven't run any benchmark (it's not even finished, I've been working on the specification before continuing the implementation), but I guess it could be slower than a rock.
---
For some recommendations, have you looked at Zig? Nim? Hare?
https://ziglang.org/
-
Syntax for defining algebraic data types
In my language (Letlang), I use the keyword class with structural pattern matching and optionally a predicate. Types (or rather, classes) can be combined with logical operators &, |, !:
-
Erlang's not about lightweight processes and message passing
Not sure this is what GP is talking about but to implement the actor model in https://letlang.dev I use tokio.
-
Features you've removed from your lang? Why did you put them in, why did you take them out?
In the early drafts of Letlang, I had the goal to add an equation solver. I got rid of that because:
-
What features would you want in a new programming language?
I'm working on a programming language inspired by erlang and which compiles to Rust: https://letlang.dev
-
Six programming languages I’d like to see
For a contract based language and a "really dynamically typed language", I'm working on https://letlang.dev
And it's because I haven't thought yet about how to do static type checking with such a feature.
I haven't got any time to work on it in the past few weeks, and I'm the only dev (would really love some help). So, it will be ready when it will be ready :P
-
Hello Letlang! My programming language targeting Rust
I use Rust generators to implement them, a rudimentary example: https://github.com/linkdd/letlang/blob/main/letlang_runtime/src/utils/entrypoint.rs
What are some alternatives?
hummus - A dialect of the Kernel programming language.
zigself - An implementation of the Self programming language in Zig
macaroni - macro spaghetti code
scenebuilder - Scene Builder is a visual, drag 'n' drop, layout tool for designing JavaFX application user interfaces.
typical - Data interchange with algebraic data types.
cells - A Common Lisp implementation of the dataflow programming paradigm
power-fx-host-samples - Samples for hosting Power Fx engine.
impulse - Impossible Dev Tools for React and Tailwind
halo - An experimental graph-based meta programming language
docs - Red-related user documentation repository
rust_lisp - A Rust-embeddable Lisp, with support for interop with native Rust functions
Lazy - Lazily evaluated (late-binding) definition for Dyalog APL