Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions

From	Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.lisp
Subject	Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions
Date	2026-10-06 08:30 +0100
Message-ID	<27332.41893.700538.905985@parhasard.net> (permalink)
References	(16 earlier) <87wlsmo83m.fsf@debian> <m3tsno4bob.fsf@pison.robolove.meer.net> <jwveceqwtg2.fsf-monnier+comp.lang.lisp@gnu.org> <118kcc1$1mri1$2@dont-email.me> <87wlrvendh.fsf@gmail.com>

Show all headers | View raw

 Ar an cúigiú lá de mí Deireadh Fómhair, scríobh steve g.: 

 > Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
 > 
 > > On Fri, 18 Sep 2026 10:12:07 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
 > >
 > >> Yeah, dynamic scoping is more friendly to funky hacks, so in a sense
 > >> static scoping has a kind of "sad/boring/serious" side to it,
 > >> discouraging you from "walking on the wild side".
 > >
 > > I find quite the opposite. Lexical binding allows you to create such
 > > useful things as function factories and class factories.
 > 
 > The biggest problem with dynamic scoping is variable shadowing.
 > 
 > (defun this (char str idx)
 >   (eql (char str idx) char))

This is orthogonal to dynamic scope. It’s a Lisp-1 vs Lisp-2 question. You’re
calling a function called #'char on local variables (in this case parameters)
called str, idx, and comparing them to the value of the local variable char.
This will work the same on Common Lisp and pre-lexical-scope Emacs Lisp.

 > It just drives me nuts thinking about it. Look at some old emacs code and
 > tell me that a defvar is bad thing :)
 > 
 > I usually use the same name for the same variables; str, len, pos, epos, idx,
 > rdx; horrifying.

Something I didn’t realise until several years in to Lisp development was that
part of the reason the example code on CLHS is not heavy on idiosyncratic
spellings, is that each distinct spelling has its own cost (the symbol has to
be interned and, pre-lexical-scope, has to stay interned.) It doesn’t matter
these days, there’s enough RAM, but the realisation did change my habits.

-- 
‘As I sat looking up at the Guinness ad, I could never figure out /
How your man stayed up on the surfboard after fourteen pints of stout’
(C. Moore)

Back to comp.lang.lisp | Previous — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Malicious Computer Architecture (was: Re: Prioritize Performance over Correctness) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-03 19:23 +0800
  Re: Malicious Computer Architecture (was: Re: Prioritize Performance over Correctness) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-08-03 14:29 +0000
    Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Kragen Javier Sitaker <kragen@canonical.org> - 2026-09-03 14:26 -0300
  Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Was: Malicious Computer Architecture) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 18:10 +0200
    But how can you deploy. when its ROM? (Was: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 18:15 +0200
      GPU Elasticity: Collective Communications Libraries (Was: But how can you deploy. when its ROM?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-07 14:37 +0200
        What are Flits and Phits? [Network on a Chip] (Re: GPU Elasticity: Collective Communications Libraries) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-07 18:07 +0200
          Cristallina: Thank you for the Beam (Re: What are Flits and Phits? [Network on a Chip]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-09 21:22 +0200
            Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-18 16:26 +0200
              How to shoot yourself in the foot (Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-18 16:50 +0200
                Re: How to shoot yourself in the foot (Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-19 03:24 +0800
              Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-19 03:21 +0800
                Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-08-18 21:13 +0100
                Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-18 22:49 +0000
                Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-19 08:32 +0800
                Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Anthk GM <anthk@disroot.org> - 2026-09-15 17:10 +0000
                Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-15 18:08 +0000
                You hear some noises in the distance (Was: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-09-15 20:21 +0200
                Re: You hear some noises in the distance (Was: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog?) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-15 20:05 +0000
                Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-08-21 02:08 -0400
                Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-21 15:25 +0800
                Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-08-21 16:28 -0400
                Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-19 08:27 +0800
              William A. Howard solved all his 99 problems (Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-23 01:48 +0200
          The Mac Neo is a Budget Monster [GPU Channels] (Re: What are Flits and Phits? [Network on a Chip]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-11 16:27 +0200
            The luminaries of duct-tape engineering [Sweeney and Torvald] (Was: The Mac Neo is a Budget Monster [GPU Channels]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-11 16:51 +0200
  Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-08-03 19:51 +0100
    Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-05 00:22 +0800
      Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-08-04 19:10 +0100
      Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-08-06 21:55 +0000
        Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-07 06:31 +0800
      Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-08-06 23:01 +0100
        Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-07 06:45 +0800
    Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Niocláisín Cóilín de Ghlostéir <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-08-04 18:13 +0000
      Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-05 03:48 +0800
        Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Niocláisín Cóilín de Ghlostéir <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-08-04 22:01 +0000
          Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-05 06:25 +0800
    GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Kragen Javier Sitaker <kragen@canonical.org> - 2026-09-03 14:37 -0300
      Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Madhu <enometh@meer.net> - 2026-09-04 08:36 +0530
        Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Kragen Javier Sitaker <kragen@canonical.org> - 2026-09-15 12:19 -0300
          Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Madhu <enometh@meer.net> - 2026-09-17 12:17 +0530
            Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-17 21:12 +0000
              Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-09-18 09:59 -0400
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-18 22:00 +0000
            Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-09-18 10:12 -0400
              Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-18 22:01 +0000
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) steve g <Sgonedes1977@gmail.com> - 2026-10-05 19:30 -0400
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-10-05 23:50 +0000
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) tfb <tfb@work.it.out> - 2026-10-06 05:11 +0000
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-10-06 08:30 +0100
              Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-09-19 14:47 +0100
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-19 21:58 +0000
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-09-19 23:24 +0100
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2026-09-19 17:23 -0700
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-09-20 03:05 -0400
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-09-22 18:20 +0000
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-09-20 22:20 +0100
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2026-09-20 16:18 -0700
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-09-21 12:56 -0400
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Madhu <enometh@meer.net> - 2026-09-22 12:22 +0530
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2026-09-22 10:15 -0700
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Madhu <enometh@meer.net> - 2026-09-23 07:33 +0530
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-09-23 07:22 +0100
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2026-09-24 03:06 -0700
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2026-09-26 04:45 +0000
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Madhu <enometh@meer.net> - 2026-09-27 16:24 +0530
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2026-09-27 15:02 -0700
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Madhu <enometh@meer.net> - 2026-09-28 10:53 +0530
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions steve g <Sgonedes1977@gmail.com> - 2026-10-05 19:47 -0400
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Anton Antimo <anton@safunu.org> - 2026-09-24 10:25 -0300
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions steve g <Sgonedes1977@gmail.com> - 2026-10-05 19:49 -0400
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2026-09-23 13:59 +0000
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-09-22 18:22 +0000
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions tfb <tfb@work.it.out> - 2026-09-24 20:01 +0000
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-09-24 20:55 +0000
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions steve g <Sgonedes1977@gmail.com> - 2026-10-05 19:41 -0400
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-21 00:18 +0000
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-21 19:06 +0000
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-22 00:42 +0000
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-09-22 18:26 +0000
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-25 21:54 +0000
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions steve g <Sgonedes1977@gmail.com> - 2026-10-05 20:13 -0400
                Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-09-22 17:51 +0000
              Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-09-22 18:02 +0000
  A Case for Impurity: The Applied Pi Calculus (Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-04 14:58 +0200
    The Sandcastle of Paul Taraus Interactors (Re: A Case for Impurity: The Applied Pi Calculus) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-04 15:10 +0200

csiph-web