netfarm VS ergolib

/u/read-eval-print-loop and I wrote GitLab CI testing configs, though I don't know how much relates to Jenkins. The general recipe is that one starts with an environment with SBCL (and Clozure and any other implementations you want to test on), clones in extra libraries if necessary, and then loads a short file which then loads the test suite, runs it, and exits with an appropriate status code, which the CI (presumably Jenkins too?) uses to produce a status to report.

Tests for the Netfarm suite and Minecraft mostly.

I threw TLA+ at a few fine-grained locking algorithms I wrote. Here is one such model. The actual implementation is more complex than the model, in particular because the real implementation of this code handles multiple concurrent resource requests, but they are "independent" enough that I can probably just prove a model with just one resource; and, as Lamport said once, the model code doesn't have to be particuarly well optimized, whereas if you are breaking locks, you probably have substantially optimized already.

I work on a metacircular Common Lisp implementation, which makes for a very boring answer. In the next closest thing to a job, I use CL for just about the whole network stack, so really anything would be suitable. But I wouldn't dare throwing a new language into a workplace, and I am not sure how much they would appreciate it.

One very niche "counter-example" is a system where loading files causes side effects, which must occur in some order. This happens in the Netfarm object system implementation, where most of the bootstrapping steps occur in an early system definition and a late system definition. In this case it is not enough to compute the dependency tree; it is necessary to pick a very specific ordering for things to not break.

Alexandria, yes, anaphora, not anymore. I do have a fairly large utility package for decentralise2, but it mainly handles concurrency and debugging things.

If it's not distributed under the Cooperative Software License, I don't want it dirtying up my CPU.

I have a macro in my personal library called BINDING-BLOCK that eliminates many though not all of the parens in common code idioms:

https://github.com/rongarret/ergolib/blob/master/core/bindin...

But like many of the sibling comments say, if you think getting rid of the parens entirely is desirable then you have missed the point, which is that Lisp code is not text, it's a data structure, a linked list, and the best way of serializing a linked list is with delimiters a the start and end, like so:

(1 2 3)

I believe the OP's ergolib provides an example. From https://github.com/rongarret/ergolib/blob/master/core/bindin..., the examples show code like:

;;; (bb

Yes. It was awesome. I used P-Lisp on an Apple II in the late 70s and it pretty much laid the foundation for my whole career. In the 80s I did my compiler class assignments in Lisp while everyone else was using Pascal or C. I got my assignments done in an hour while everyone else took days. I still got an A. I did my masters and Ph.D. thesis work using Coral Common Lisp (now Clozure Common Lisp) first on a Mac Plus, then a Mac II, then a Quadra. Nowadays I run CCL on an MBP. I still use some of the library code I wrote back in the 90s.

to get a list of primes under 100.

See https://github.com/rongarret/ergolib for an implementation of WITH-COLLECTOR and lots of other constructs that are IMHO the Right Way to write code.

Any code modification is a potential security issue. There is nothing special about dynamic class redefinition in this regard.

I use it for deployment. I can deploy new code without having to take my application down. In fact, not only do all my existing instances get updated, but I also use an ORM [1] that automatically updates my database tables too.

[1] https://github.com/rongarret/ergolib/blob/master/layer1/sql....