freenode/lisp - IRC Chatlog

10:46:34 DGASAU` ** NICK DGASAU

14:44:59 rk[ghost] err.. how to coerce a string to integer?

14:45:26 Xach_ rk[ghost]: there is no coercion. parse-integer returns an integer given a proper string.

14:46:30 rk[ghost] Xach_: right-o.. just what i wanted

14:46:39 dispersed i guess you need to specify a gödel numbering on strings

14:47:12 Ven ** NICK Guest80266

14:47:27 rk[ghost] trying to convert my bash scripts to CL.. so far high friction =P

14:47:44 dispersed bash is a domain specific language

14:47:52 dispersed lisp is pretty much the opposite

14:49:51 Xach_ rk[ghost]: sometimes the ideas are much more portable than the implementation.

14:51:13 rk[ghost] dispersed: i disagree. lisp is a language for making DSLs

14:51:22 rk[ghost] thus can be a DSL

14:51:52 rk[ghost] Xach_: aye, the friction comes from how bash does stuff and how lisp wants to do stuff

14:52:09 rk[ghost] i just want to migrate off of bash because it lacks everything

14:52:36 rk[ghost] however, when dealing with filesystem.. it is nice

14:53:01 rk[ghost] lisp = everything is a symbol.. bash = everything is a string

14:56:14 dispersed since when do you implement DSLs in a DSL

14:56:23 dispersed maybe if that's what the DSL is for

14:56:28 dispersed but lisp isn't a DSL...

15:02:25 rk[ghost] you don't think lisp is a DSL for making DSLs?

15:04:19 _death no need to be hung up on terms like "DSL", which tend to be used by nonlispers anyway, as lispers take it for granted and in a much more pervasive way

15:08:56 White_Flame lisp is a general purpose language that can make DSLs

15:09:38 White_Flame DSLs are never general purpose (that would violate the D-S part), so Lisp itself isn't a DSL