Re: Lisp/Unix impedance [a programming challenge]

"Joseph Wecker" <ggroups.jwecker@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> "I'm trying to get people to think about the mismatch between Common
> Lisp and Unix and why there may be valid technical reasons for
> avoiding Common Lisp as a glue language upon Unix."

I think this is a useful discussion, and not very contrived.
Some people have pointed out that Common Lisp is good for doing
things that are much more complex than your "challenge".
That's all well and good, but it does not address your actual
question, which is only about Unix scripting.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Lisp/Unix impedance [a programming challenge]
    ... > portable, Unix or no. ... octets as if they were text and vice versa. ... Lisp character stream and Common Lisp characters to an octet stream is ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Lisp/Unix impedance [a programming challenge]
    ... >> technical reasons for avoiding Common Lisp as a glue language upon Unix. ... > binary data as a stream of character like any other unix. ... Note also that any modern Unix should default to a UTF-8 locale (and if it ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Lisp/Unix impedance [a programming challenge]
    ... >> the text is just a fragment of a larger Unix stream. ... > soon as you show us a portable shell script that is able to use them to ... I'd propose even to implement this challenge in Common Lisp ... technical reasons for avoiding Common Lisp as a glue language upon Unix. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Lisp/Unix impedance [a programming challenge]
    ... about the mismatch between Common Lisp and Unix and why there may be ... technical reasons for avoiding Common Lisp as a glue language upon ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Lisp/Unix impedance [a programming challenge]
    ... > about the mismatch between Common Lisp and Unix and why there may be ... > technical reasons for avoiding Common Lisp as a glue language upon ... Having only recently discovered scsh and then immediately wishing for a ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)