sealable-metaobjects VS ccl

I wonder if things like https://github.com/marcoheisig/sealable-metaobjects would help with the speed while keeping the CLOSiness.

About static typing and generic functions, are there limitations to fast-generic-functions built over sealable-metaobjects too? I felt that reasonable, albeit it takes away the dynamic nature of the objects after sealing.

There's plenty of history of s-expression formats for documentation. One example is: https://github.com/Clozure/ccl/tree/master/doc/manual

But, also, there's plenty of uses of XML that are not "artcles and books". For example, Maven's pom.xml and log4j2.xml.

The descendant of CCL runs on modern Intel Macs. (It also runs on Linux and Windows but without the IDE.) The modern IDE is quite a bit different from the original. In particular, it no longer has the interface builder. But it's still pretty good. It is now called Clozure Common Lisp (so the acronym is still CCL) and you can find it here:

https://ccl.clozure.com/

If you want to run the original that is a bit of a challenge, but still possible. The original was never ported directly to OS X so you have to run it either on old hardware or an emulator running some version of the original MacOS, or on an older Mac running Rosetta 1. In the latter case you will want to look for something called RMCL. Also be aware that Coral Common Lisp was renamed Macintosh Common Lisp (i.e. MCL) before it became Clozure Common Lisp (CCL again).

This looks like it might be a promising place to start:

https://github.com/binghe/mcl

If you need more help try this mailing list:

https://lists.clozure.com/mailman/listinfo/openmcl-devel

Download: https://github.com/Clozure/ccl/releases/tag/v1.12.2

I was not aware that UIOP provided that function. plain-common-lisp used to be implemented with Clozure CL but eventually moved to SBCL due to the lack of maintenance of CCL. But now there is a hard dependency on SBCL.

I have decided it is time to have some fun and use Common Lisp to create algorithm representation that deals with parallel execution. For this I decided to use Clozure common lisp, put basic Qucklisp there and load some libraries to do this.

Lisp must be read outside->in to understand what it is saying. Given (foo (a) (b c)), if you don't know what foo is and just start reading (b c), which is inside, hoping that later you can work out what is foo, you could be going down a blind alley. foo could be a macro or special operator which entirely controls what (b c) means.

To understand what is calculated in Lisp, given that you understand what the syntax means, the evaluation is inside->out.

That's no different from math. In any languages that have math-like nested expressions with bracketing, you have inside-out evaluation.

The alternative are catenative languages and such, which have never been mainstream.

There are assembly languages which go line by line.

Imperative languages with statements and expressions tend to have small expressions where evaluation is followed inside-out; the rest of the control flow is just top down, with some forward and backward skips.

Lisp has all of the above in it. Lisp can be assembly language. For instance, in thsi source file from Clozure Common Lisp:

https://github.com/Clozure/ccl/blob/master/level-0/ARM/arm-h...

  (defarmlapfunction fast-mod-3 ((number arg_x) (divisor arg_y) (recip arg_z))