Common Lisp

Summary

Common Lisp (CL) is a dialect of the Lisp programming language, published in American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard document ANSI INCITS 226-1994 (S20018) (formerly X3.226-1994 (R1999)). The Common Lisp HyperSpec, a hyperlinked HTML version, has been derived from the ANSI Common Lisp standard. The Common Lisp language was developed as a standardized and improved successor of Maclisp. By the early 1980s several groups were already at work on diverse successors to MacLisp: Lisp Machine Lisp (aka ZetaLisp), Spice Lisp, NIL and S-1 Lisp. Common Lisp sought to unify, standardise, and extend the features of these MacLisp dialects. Common Lisp is not an implementation, but rather a language specification. Several implementations of the Common Lisp standard are available, including free and open-source software and proprietary products. Common Lisp is a general-purpose, multi-paradigm programming language. It supports a combination of procedural, functional, and object-oriented

Official source

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Lisp

About this result

This page is automatically generated and may contain information that is not correct, complete, up-to-date, or relevant to your search query. The same applies to every other page on this website. Please make sure to verify the information with EPFL's official sources.

Related publications (9)

Related publications

Related people (1)

Related people

Related units (1)

Related units

Related concepts (104)

Related concepts

Related courses (3)

Related courses

Related lectures (4)

Related lectures

Related publications (9)

Macro annotations are an important feature in Scala 2 macro system. Many projects use macro annotations to implement their systems or libraries. Due to the unportability of Scala 2 macro system, Scala 3 redesigns the macro system to make it more reliable and portable. But macro annotations have not been implemented in Scala 3 yet, resulting in some inconvenience in migrating projects that use macro annotations to Scala 3. Following the core design of Scala 2 macro annotations, we introduce the macro annotations as transformations from definitions to definitions. In this thesis, we also list rules to keep our simplicity but not hurt its functionality at the same time. The main difference between macro annotations of Scala 2 and Scala 3 is that in Scala 2 macro annotations expand before typechecking, while they expand after typechecking in Scala 3. Our implementation is based on a breadth-first approach, which helps us implement a tail-recursive transformation. We write test cases covering common and even uncommon cases to test the correctness of our macro annotation system.

2022

Fast Functional Lists, Hash-Lists, Deques and Variable Length Arrays

Since its inception Functional Programming, J. McCarthy, has almost universally used the Linked List as the underpinning data structure. This paper introduces a new data structure, the VList, that is compact, thread safe and significantly faster to use than Linked Lists for nearly all list operations. Space usage can be reduced by 50% to 90% and in typical list operations speed improved by factors ranging from 4 to 20 or more. Some important operations such as indexing and length are typically changed from O(N) to O(1) and O(lgN) respectively. A language interpreter Visp, using a dialect of Common Lisp, has been implemented using VLists and the benchmark comparison with OCAML reported. It is also shown how to adapt the structure to create variable length arrays, persistent deques and functional hash tables. The VArray requires no resize copying and has an average O(1) random access time. Comparisons are made with previous resizable one dimensional arrays, Hash Array Trees (HAT) Sitarski [1996], and Brodnik, Carlsson, Demaine, Munro, and Sedgewick [1999].

2002

Lisp Extensions for Multiprocessing

James Richard Larus

Extensions to Common Lisp for concurrent computation on multiprocessors are discussed. Functions for process creation, communication, and synchronization are described. Process objects create multiple threads of control. Processes are lightweight so that programmers can use them to take advantage of fine-grained parallelism. Communication and synchronization are managed with mailboxes. Signals allow processes to communicate using asynchronous interrupts. These constructs are used to implement several higher-level multiprocessing abstractions. These include structured processes, a parallel tree search, and dataflow computation

IEEE1989