kagevf

> even if by some chance it included some "vi mode", it would simply be an emulation, not an actual vi editor

Lem supports vim key bindings, according to its README.

btw, I don't have any issues with emacs keybindings, but I chuckled at the "Emacs RSI bindings" :)

In fact, I think vim keybindings are superior for editing - you can't beat hitting "." to repeat an action - but after using emacs for ~5 years I find myself in it a lot more than I expected when I started using it. The whole thing with key bindings is that for whichever one(s) you use your muscle memory catches up.

vim has 2 implementations of slime.

Lem is a new editor written in Common Lisp that has slime "built-in".

> why on God's green earth is the present working directory not searched for the package I'm trying to build, like every other build system to ever exist?

What if you want to share packages (aka CL systems) between different CL systems / applications?

> any system that relies on information that was typed into a REPL three-months ago and is now only stored in the binary state of that REPL and nowhere else

Implemenations like SBCL can produce executables. Source code is stored in files and can be versioned.

> The only person trying to fix this [is] Fukamachi

There are other ways to get dependencies, such as ultra lisp https://ultralisp.org/ and OCICL https://github.com/ocicl/ocicl.

All in the service of interactivity, a key feature of CL.

Yeah, was aware of that possibility; I guess I should have made a point about the disctinction between symbols vs "possible sound combinations" (my words). And even "possible sound combinations" can be further limited to "actually used sound combinations" as mentioned in the answer on that SO link.

So, in terms of "possible sound combinations" I think Japanese would likely be on the lower side given that the number of sounds are also pretty low. Alright, thank you for that reply; the point in the original post I replied to makes more sense to me now.

> there are languages with a relatively small number of distinct syllables, like Japanese

Japanese has around 50 syllabic symbols, depending on how you count - include both sets of kana? include more archaic kana? etc

What would be a more typical number of syllabic symbols? I tried googling it to get an idea, but couldn't find much useful information. I guess Arabic has 28?

Not sure it counts as "multicursors" but overwriting a rectangle using C-x r t (string-rectangle) is pretty handy in emacs.

Interesting, I did not know that! But, the one I wrote mimics how insert-parentheses works, so I will probably stick to my version.

With built-in emacs functionality you can do:

1. Place the cursor on the left parenthesis of the form (same as you wrote)

2. C-M-Space to select the form.

3. M-( to surrond with parenthesis.

4. type "if flag" (same as you wrote for #3)

One extra step, but no need for a plugin.

Also, I added a simple "insert-quotes" that I think I mostly copy-pasted from the built-in "insert-parentheses":

  (defun insert-quotes (&optional arg)
    (interactive "P")
    (insert-pair arg ?\" ?\"))

So I can replace my #3 above to wrap something with quotes instead of parentheses.

> Creating a language designed for being manipulated this way

AFAIK, Lisp wasn't created for structural editing, it was just a "happy accident" that it lends itself so well to the technique. Even without the paredit and parinfer plugins, emacs already has good support for structural editing built-in. It reminds me of VIM text objects, but geared directly for Lisp syntax, ie. symbolic expressions.

> a couple of famous Haskell folks.

Who?

> adding support for light/dark mode

It's there.

  M-x invert-face

Then, type "default"

Also, checkout M-x customize-themes for some other decent built-in themes.

A garbage reddit post produces this great comment - only on HN! :)

And somehow, my reply managed to avoid using that letter ...

I think it's meant to be a sarcastic take of the next iteration after VS Code :)

> the worse is better approach is better.

I think this ties back to the idea of "get it working, then once it's working go back and make it fast | preformant | better for whatever meaning of better".

I think much of the consternation towards "worse is better" comes from re-inventing things to achieve the "make it better" improvements from scratch instead of leveraging existing knowledge. Re-inventing might be fine, but we shouldn't throw away knowledge and establshed techniques if we can avoid it.

To me, the form is not intuitive, but the result is:

  ((1 2) 3 4)

Someone else in that thread mentioned that CONS is basically adding (1 2) to the front of the (3 4) list, and that helped me understand it better.

I wrote "not *as* caustic" ... in particular, he wasn't being caustic toward Lee, but rather to the idea of cons pairs being redundant.

It's enough of distinction to make me think I should re-examine what Naggum had to say - in this and in other posts - and not get caught up in any pre-conceived notions I might have had about him.

He does have a tendency to write off people as “fanatics”.

This doesn't come across as "caustic" as when I previously read it. And the "bile" isn't directed so much at Lee as it is at something he wrote; "All in all, the pairs notion is redundant."

Naggum genuinely seems to be hoping that his long and thorough explanation will convince Lee of his point of view, and not as a put down.

> I hope you understand and appreciate what I have written above so the following does not apply to you anymore.

The "following" where he goes off on what Lee wrote, but not on Lee himself.

It might be worth it for me to re-read Naggum's posts, now that I have a better understanding of where he was coming from.

I tried using "r" (with quotes) on indeed, and got some hits where R was listed as one of the necessary skills.

I remember back when putting together PCs in the 90s if the cable for the IDE drive was connected incorrectly it would emit smoke - I didn't directly experience it, but any instructions I had read warned about it.

And, how will the existence of source control management in both GitHub and Azure DevOps be reconciled?

Do you use LW's built-in editor, or emacs?

> Unfortunately the SLIME REPL itself (its read eval print loop) is not great

> Another way of working got lost...

You singled out SLIME, but you've mentioned before that you use LispWorks - do you think it's also "not great"? Just curious ...

> Does anyone remember Groovy?

I recall that Atlassian had some kind of scripting console where you could run Groovy and interact with its API / objects. It was useful for exploring when writing plugins for bamboo or Jira ...

> "Win9x is MS-DOS with a graphical shell"

I think if you replaced “Win9x” with Windows 3.1 - or earlier - it would be true.

> able to hold

Would "grasp" work?

CL is case-sensitive, but it handles things so you typically don't have to be aware of it. I don't think I'm smart enough to try to do something clever on top of that, so I hope I can avoid your pain.

Not to mention “Go” …