Re: "Essential lisp utilities": where are they?

On Oct 31, 8:07 am, Andreas Davour <ante...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
"William James" <w_a_x_...@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
Mirko.Vuko...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

Hello,

I recall seeing a library of "essential lisp utilities", but I just
spent a better part of an hour going through cliki, my bookmarks,
installed libraries, and the web, and other than suspects such as
trivial-features, and cannot find it.

The reason is that I just wrote a little macro with-dir
(defmacro with-dir ((new-dir) &body body)
`(let ((old-dir (ext:cd)))
;; (format t "will move to ~a~%" ,new-dir)
(ext:cd ,new-dir)
;; (format t "current dir ~a~%" (ext:cd))
,@body
(ext:cd old-dir)))

A macro isn't needed for this.

Ruby:

def with_dir new_dir
old_dir = Dir.getwd
Dir.chdir new_dir
yield
Dir.chdir old_dir
end

p Dir.getwd
with_dir( ".." ){ p Dir.getwd }
p Dir.getwd

William, to post a solution to a problem in a comp.lang.* group in
another language than the one the group is set up to discuss is counter
productive and rude. Please don't.

I disagree. In fact, to be strict, his post is relevant in showing
macros are not necessary to the original question, while your poste is
off-topic.

Newsgroups got lots tech geekers like you that makes it suffer.

Further readings:

• Cross-posting & Language Factions
http://xahlee.org/Netiquette_dir/cross-post.html

plain text version follows:
----------------------
Cross-posting & Language Factions

Xah Lee, 2007-03-29

(The following article is originally cross-posted on 2007-04-16 to the
folowing newsgroups: comp.lang.perl.misc, comp.lang.python,
comp.lang.lisp, comp.lang.java.programmer, comp.lang.functional.)

Dear tech geekers,

In the past year i have crossed-posted (e.g. recently What are OOP's
Jargons and Complexities, Is laziness a programer's virtue?, On Java's
Interface (the meaning of interface in computer programing), there are
some controversy, and lots of off-topic and careless following.

I think there are few things today's tech geekers should remind
themselves:

• If you deem something off-topic to “your” newsgroup, and want to
tech-geek by changing the “follow-up group”, start with yourself.
Please do not cross-post yourself, and tweak the follow-up, and
proudly proclaim that you changed the follow-up as a benign gesture.

• Please remind yourself what is on-topic and off-topic. Unless you
are the authority of a online forum, otherwise, netiquette discussion,
policing, are off-topic in general, and only tend to worsen the
forum's quality. This issue is realized in newsgroup communities as
early as early 1990s.

• The facility of cross-posting is a good thing as a progress of
communication technology, and the action of cross-posting is a good
thing with respect to communication. What the common tech-geekers's
sensitivity to cross-posting are due to this collective's lack of
understanding of social aspects of communication. Cross-posting isn't
a problem. The problem is the power-struggling male nature and
defensiveness in propagating the tongues of a tech geeker's own.

Tech-geeker's behavior towards cross-posting over the years did
nothing to enhance the content quality of newsgroups, but engendered
among computing language factions incommunicado, and aided in the
proliferation of unnecessary re-invention (e.g. the likes of Perl,
PHP, Python, Ruby that are essentially the same) and stagnation (e.g.
the lisp camp with their above-it attitude).

If you are a programer of X and is learning Y or wondering about Y,
please do cross-post it. If your article is relevant to X, Y, and Z,
please cross post it. If you are really anti-cross-posting, please use
a online forum that is more specialized with controlled communication,
such as mailing lists, developer's blogs, and website-based forums.

I hope that the computing newsgroups will revive to its ancient nature
of verdant cross communication of quality content, as opposed to
today's rampant messages focused on political in-fighting, mutual
sneering, closed-mindedness, and careless postings.

References:

Tech Geekers versus Spammers

Netiquette Guidelines, 1995, by S Hambridge. (RFC 1855)
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855

Xah
∑ http://xahlee.org/

☄
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: how to say "god does not exist" in arabic?
    ... and Peter was explaining why you should. ... >> Shouldn't there be something in Usenet etiquette about posting to ... >> unanswerable form of communication. ... >Yes, cross-posting is often abused, but there's nothing wrong with it ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Cross-Posting (X-Posting) Preferable to Multi-Posting? - Re: An admission that CIA t
    ... Well, there are no actual *laws* in Usenet, are there? ... & in Usenet it's down to the people *reading* the Newsgroups, ... Cross-Posting is preferable to Multi-Posting. ...
    (uk.people.silversurfers)
  • Re: Rule for Cross Posts?
    ... Cross-posting is good if used correctly. ... to multiple RELATED newsgroups then you should cross-post. ... You really need to hide their replies from each ... Worse than cross-posting are those that use the FollowUp-To header to ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.inetexplorer.ie6_outlookexpress)
  • (FAQ) Welcome to AOLM, read this first if youre new.
    ... you can get an answer a lot faster without posting your question ... A comprehensive overview of 159 Linux newsgroups: ... try to think of what will best help the reader when he ... called "cross-posting". ...
    (alt.os.linux)
  • A new reader? Welcome to comp.os.linux.misc, read this first if youre new here (FAQ)
    ... Posting on the newsgroups. ... A comprehensive overview of 159 Linux newsgroups: ... try to think of what will best help the reader ... Anyway, to summarize, cross-posting is infinitely better than ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)