<div><font class="Apple-style-span" face="arial, sans-serif"><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">< It would also be nice to have the full-featured JS environments (V8,</span></div><div>
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">Rhino, SpiderMonkey) as another target for CL deployment. ></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;"><br></span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">I think this is going to become increasingly important as the JS</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">implementations improve. The recent release of Clojurescript is an</span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">indicator.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;"><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">We've actually switched Skysheet to using PS server-side as well as</span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">client-side so we can deploy to V8 on the server. There are three</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">reasons for this:</span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;"><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">1) it eliminates the impedance mismatch between our CL code and our PS</span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">code, which was a drag on development (example: JS's hash objects</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">don't have a very good counterpart in CL; neither CL hashtables nor</span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">plists/alists are a great substitute);</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;"><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">2) we get better performance from V8 than we do from SBCL. (That's for</span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">unoptimized CL. Optimized CL would do much better of course, but that</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">would worsen the impedance mismatch described above;</span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;"><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">3) interoperability with JS gives some desired conveniences, like V8's</span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">fast JSON support and Node.js for non-blocking i/o.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;"><br></span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">A full CL-in-JS would open the door to an all-CL system rather than an</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">all-JS one. Either would be better than straddling the two. Would we</span></div>
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">switch? Hard to say.</span></div><div style="border-collapse: collapse; "><br></div></font><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Vladimir Sedach <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:vsedach@gmail.com">vsedach@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">Currently Parenscript uses some things from Common Lisp that aren't in<br>
Parenscript. The three approaches to make PS self-hosting are:<br>
<br>
1. Rewrite PS code in a DSL that can be compiled with Parenscript. For<br>
example, replace car/cdr/etc. with destructuring and templating macros<br>
that translate to car/cdr for CL and array access in JS. Then on the<br>
JS side you'd construct your code from arrays instead of conses. The<br>
only problematic thing is symbol representation.<br>
<br>
2. Implement the missing CL features as a run-time library (add a cons<br>
prototype with car/cdr methods).<br>
<br>
3. Make a Common Lisp implementation that runs in JavaScript.<br>
<br>
I think the last option is the most overall useful, and the most fun<br>
to do. Parenscript then would (along with an existing CL<br>
implementation) act as a "syslisp"/bootstrapping dialect and<br>
cross-compiler. Red Daly already has large parts of the needed CL<br>
runtime implemented in his PSOS project<br>
(<a href="https://github.com/gonzojive/paren-psos" target="_blank">https://github.com/gonzojive/paren-psos</a>).<br>
<br>
How useful would Parenscript be in the browser? My guess is not very.<br>
After all, it will just be a macro pre-processor over JavaScript's<br>
eval, and anything you can do with that you're better off doing with<br>
closures.<br>
<br>
OTOH having a full Common Lisp on the browser (*with* a working ASDF)<br>
would be pretty sweet. It would also be nice to have the full-featured<br>
JS environments (V8, Rhino, SpiderMonkey) as another target for CL<br>
deployment.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
Vladimir<br>
</font><div class="im"><br>
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 7:24 AM, Anton Vodonosov <<a href="mailto:avodonosov@yandex.ru">avodonosov@yandex.ru</a>> wrote:<br>
</div><div><div></div><div class="h5">> Hello.<br>
><br>
> I am new in parenscript and only glanced through the documentation on the project page.<br>
><br>
> As I understand parenscript source is compiled to javascript using a CL implemented compiler.<br>
><br>
> It's interesting, how difficult it is to have the same compiler implemented on javascript (i.e. on parenscript itself).<br>
><br>
> As parenscript is a subset of CL, in theory it mitght be not difficult.<br>
><br>
> The goal - is to have a browser only Lisp implementation, that can work without hunchentoot. To include parenscript<br>
> scripts onto browser directly, redefine functions interactively and so on.<br>
><br>
> What do you think?<br>
><br>
> Best regards,<br>
> - Anton<br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> parenscript-devel mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:parenscript-devel@common-lisp.net">parenscript-devel@common-lisp.net</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/parenscript-devel" target="_blank">http://lists.common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/parenscript-devel</a><br>
><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
parenscript-devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:parenscript-devel@common-lisp.net">parenscript-devel@common-lisp.net</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/parenscript-devel" target="_blank">http://lists.common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/parenscript-devel</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>