lisp

You are currently browsing articles tagged lisp.

Programming Language Popularity – Part Four

September 22, 2011 in programming, software | Add a comment

I compiled some programming language popularity statistics in April 2009, October 2009 and October 2010 . Here’s an update for September 2011:

I made a number of Google searches of the forms below and summed the results (previous posts averaged the results):

"implemented in <language>"
  "written in <language>"

Naturally this is of very limited utility, and the numbers are only useful when comparing relatively within the same search since the number of results Google returns can vary greatly over time.

Language Total Prev. Position Position Delta
C 10,360,000 2 1
PHP 10,351,000 1 -1
C++ 6,495,000 3 0
Python 5,759,000 5 1
C# 5,335,000 4 -1
 
Java 4,890,000 8 2
Perl 3,702,000 6 -1
JavaScript 3,077,000 7 -1
Ruby 1,654,000 9 0
Lisp Family1 1,022,870 11 1
 
FORTRAN 975,600 10 -1
Tcl 594,500 12 0
Lisp 486,000 14 1
Haskell 450,500 16 2
Erlang 419,700 13 -2
 
Lua 367,100 18 2
ML Family2 348,400 17 0
COBOL 308,270 15 -3
Common Lisp 254,900 19 0
OCaml 240,300 21 1
 
Prolog 224,000 20 -1
Scala 203,400 23 1
Scheme 184,700 22 -1
Smalltalk 129,700 24 0
Clojure 84,600 27 2
 
(S)ML3 83,630 25 -1
Forth 69,980 26 -1
Caml 24,470 28 0
Io 17,700 30 1
Arc 12,670 29 -1

1 combines Lisp, Scheme, Common Lisp, Arc & Clojure
2 combines OCaml, (S)ML, Caml
3 summed separate searches for sml and ml

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Programming Language Popularity – Part Three

October 8, 2010 in programming | 1 comment

I compiled some programming language popularity statistics in April 2009 and October 2009 . Here’s an update for October 2010:

I made a number of Google searches of the forms below and averaged the results:

"implemented in <language>"
  "written in <language>"

Naturally this is of very limited utility, and the numbers are only useful when comparing relatively within one column since the number of results Google returns can vary greatly over time.

Language Apr 2009 Oct 2009 Oct 2010 Position Delta
PHP 680,000 5,083,500 14,096,000 +3
C 1,905,500 16,975,000 9,675,000 -1
C++ 699,000 6,270,000 6,510,000 -1
C# 349,700 2,125,000 5,132,000 +4
Python 396,000 3,407,000 5,114,500 +1
Perl 365,500 3,132,500 4,675,000 +1
JavaScript 102,700 1,163,000 2,120,000 +4
Java 850,000 5,118,000 1,495,500 -5
Ruby 99,650 227,000 1,426,000 +13
FORTRAN 1,621,000 770,850 0
Lisp Family1 176,507 3,489,650 399,685 -6
Tcl 44,800 382,000 313,400 +5
Erlang 22,285 161,700 188,800 +12
Lisp 61,900 486,500 174,050 +1
COBOL 247,300 166,435 +6
Haskell 22,550 280,500 157,150 +4
ML Family2 29,062 1,003,800 149,005 -5
Lua 13,065 131,800 128,150 +9
Common Lisp 20,600 554,500 112,750 -5
Prolog 17,750 390,500 100,000 -4
OCaml 22,000 343,500 99,050 -3
Scheme 86,450 2,100,000 82,650 -13
Scala 3,570 66,250 65,950 +6
Smalltalk 9,105 187,500 56,950 0
(S)ML3 5,173 590,700 42,130 -12
Forth 6,465 146,450 25,880 0
Clojure 782 62,200 23,525 +3
Caml 1,889 69,600 7,825 0
Arc 6,775 286,500 6,710 -10
Io 1,760 198,500 3,025 -7

1 combines Lisp, Scheme, Common Lisp, Arc & Clojure
2 combines OCaml, (S)ML, Caml
3 summed separate searches for sml and ml

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Programming Language Popularity – Part Two

October 24, 2009 in programming | Add a comment

I compiled some programming language popularity statistics in April and mentioned I’d update the results in 6 months, so here they are:

I made a number of Google searches of the forms below and averaged the results:

"implemented in <language>"
"written in <language>"

Language # Results
Apr 09		 # Results
Oct 09		 Position
Delta
C 1,905,500 16,975,000 0
C++ 699,000 6,270,000 +1
Java 850,000 5,118,000 -1
PHP 680,000 5,083,500 0
Lisp Family1 176,507 3,489,650 +3
Python 396,000 3,407,000 -1
Perl 365,500 3,132,500 -1
C# 349,700 2,125,000 -1
Scheme 86,450 2,100,000 +2
FORTRAN 1,621,000 N/A
JavaScript 102,700 1,163,000 -1
ML Family2 29,062 1,003,800 +3
(S)ML3 5,173 590,700 +12
Common Lisp 20,600 554,500 +5
Lisp 61,900 486,500 -2
Prolog 17,750 390,500 +4
Tcl 44,800 382,000 -3
OCaml 22,000 343,500 0
Arc 6,775 286,500 +4
Haskell 22,550 280,500 -4
COBOL 247,300 N/A
Ruby 99,650 227,000 -10
Io 1,760 198,500 +6
Smalltalk 9,105 187,500 -1
Erlang 22,285 161,700 -7
Forth 6,465 146,450 -1
Lua 13,065 131,800 -5
Caml 1,889 69,600 0
Scala 3,570 66,250 -2
Clojure 782 62,200 0

1 combines Lisp, Scheme, Common Lisp, Arc & Clojure
2 combines OCaml, (S)ML, Caml
3 summed separate searches for sml and ml

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Daniel Weinreb re: Lisp use at ITA

August 29, 2009 in business, programming, technology, video | 1 comment

Some random notes:

  • 650 KLOC plus 150 KLOC of open source code
  • 100 people on the team, 70 programmers
  • SBCL for the QPX product
  • Clozure CL for the reservations product
  • Availability requirement: four 9’s => less than 53 minutes downtime per year
  • Latency agreement

    • 90% of requests w/in 300 ms
    • 5% of requests w/in 600 ms
    • 5% of requests w/in 1,200 ms
  • Java presentation layer, Common Lisp stateless business layer, Oracle data layer
  • Daniel is very positive about Clojure
  • Some links from the talk:



Tags:

Programming Language Popularity

April 21, 2009 in programming | 10 comments

Despite the numerous ways in existence to quantify programming language popularity, I thought I’d throw yet another one into the mix. I made a number of Google searches of the forms below and averaged the results:

"implemented in <language>"
"written in <language>"

I’m very curious to see how these stats change over time, so I’ve added a calendar item to recompute them in six months. Leave a comment if you’d like to add a programming language to the list, and I’ll update this article and it will be included in the recomputation six months from now.

Language # Results
C 1,905,500
Java 850,000
C++ 699,000
PHP 680,000
Python 396,000
Perl 365,500
C# 349,700
Lisp Family1 176,507
JavaScript 102,700
Ruby 99,650
Scheme 86,450
Lisp 61,900
Tcl 44,800
ML Family2 29,062
Haskell 22,550
Erlang 22,285
OCaml 22,000
Common Lisp 20,600
Prolog 17,750
Lua 13,065
Smalltalk 9,105
Arc 6,775
Forth 6,465
(S)ML3 5,173
Scala 3,570
Caml 1,889
Io 1,760
Clojure 782

1 combines Lisp, Scheme, Common Lisp, Arc & Clojure
2 combines OCaml, (S)ML, Caml
3 summed separate searches for sml and ml
Update 4/23/09 added C#, Tcl per comment requests.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Digest Tag Population in Ruby

March 1, 2009 in programming | 6 comments

I saw a post on comp.lang.lisp demonstrating the suitability of Common Lisp for functional programming. The poster asked to see versions in other languages including Ruby, so I thought I’d whip something up. Here’s the original post with description of the problem:

This one was too much fun for words in re how cool it is programming
with Lisp. I would like to see this in Ruby, Clojure, Qi, and
Scheme. The precise fun part tho is typing it all in in the final form
versus dividing the thing up into steps to get intermediate results,
ie, a test of one's mastery of one's language. Non-functional
languages I guess have no choice but to stop and assign temporaries.

Given:

(defparameter *pets*
  '((dog ((blab 12)(glab 17)(cbret 82)(dober 42)(gshep 25)))
    (cat ((pers 22)(siam 7)(tibet 52)(russ 92)(meow 35)))
    (snake ((garter 10)(cobra 37)(python 77)(adder 24)(rattle 40)))
    (cow ((jersey 200)(heiffer 300)(moo 400)))))

Write:

(defun digest-tag-population (tag-population pick-tags count)...)

Such that:

(digest-tag-population *pets* '(dog cat snake) 5)

=> ((DOG CBRET 82) (DOG DOBER 42) (CAT RUSS 92) (CAT TIBET 52) (SNAKE
PYTHON 77))

...the rules being:

- consider only the populations of tags (the first symbol in each
sublist) found in the parameter pick-tags, a list

- take only the  most populous of the union of the populations

- return (tag name population) of the most populous in this order:

    firstly, by position of the tag in pick-tags
    second, ie within a tag, in descending order of population

(defun subseq-ex (st e s)
  (subseq s st (min e (length s))))

(defun digest-tag-population (tag-population pick-tags count)
  (flet ((tagpos (tag) (position tag pick-tags)))
    (stable-sort (subseq-ex 0 count
                   (sort (loop for (tag population) in tag-population
                             when (tagpos tag)
                             append (loop for pop in population
                                        collecting (list* tag pop)))
                     '> :key (lambda (x)
                               (caddr x))))
      '< :key (lambda (x) (tagpos (car x))))))

(defparameter *pets*
  '((dog ((blab 12)(glab 17)(cbret 82)(dober 42)(gshep 25)))
    (cat ((pers 22)(siam 7)(tibet 52)(russ 92)(meow 35)))
    (snake ((garter 10)(cobra 37)(python 77)(adder 24)(rattle 40)))
    (cow ((jersey 200)(heiffer 300)(moo 400)))))

#+test
(digest-tag-population *pets* '(dog cat snake) 5)

And here is my Ruby version:

PETS = [
  [:dog, [[:blab, 12], [:glab, 17], [:cbret, 82], [:dober, 42], [:gshep, 25]]],
  [:cat, [[:pers, 22], [:siam, 7], [:tibet, 52], [:russ, 92], [:meow, 35]]],
  [:snake, [[:garter, 10], [:cobra, 37], [:python, 77], [:adder, 24], [:rattle, 40]]],
  [:cow, [[:jersey, 200], [:heiffer, 300], [:moo, 400]]]
]

def digest_tag_population tag_population, pick_tags, count
  tag_population.select {|e| pick_tags.include?(e[0]) }.
    inject([]) {|memo,obj| obj[1].each {|e| memo << [obj[0], e[0], e[1]] }; memo }.
    sort {|a,b| b[2] <=> a[2] }[0,count].
    sort_by {|e| [ tag_population.map{|p| p[0]}.rindex(e[0]), e[2] * -1] }
end

digest_tag_population(PETS, [:dog, :cat, :snake], 5)

Within the function:
Line 1: select elements that match the pick tags
Line 2: map to a list of tuples of the form [:dog, :blab, 12]
Line 3: sort the list of tuples by population and select the first count of them
Line 4: sort by tag position, population

Output:

[[:dog, :cbret, 82],
[:dog, :dober, 42],
[:cat, :russ, 92],
[:cat, :tibet, 52],
[:snake, :python, 77]]

I think Ruby compares very favorably. What do you think? Feel free to submit a version in another language.

Tags: , , , ,

Blog Bifurcation

May 31, 2008 in communication | 8 comments

One of the reasons I haven’t been blogging much lately is because I’ve decided to bifurcate my blog into a professional/technical blog (which will continue here on lojic.com/blog) and a personal blog, and until I’ve decided on the technology to use for my personal blog I’ve been reluctant to blog much.

The motivation for the split is the feeling that a lot of my non-technical family & friends grow weary of weeding through a lot of techno-geek material to find anything interesting, and folks who read my blog for technical info probably don’t want to weed through the silly videos, etc.

Wordpress has worked fine for my blog thus far, but I want to take the opportunity to develop my personal blog in a new technology more for the learning experience than necessity. I haven’t had time to select the appropriate technology, so I have a bit of analysis paralysis.

The candidates are:

  • Ruby on Rails: I currently develop primarily in Ruby on Rails, so in that respect it would be the logical choice and easiest way to get started; however, it wouldn’t have the benefit of learning a new technology.
  • Arc: I had high hopes for Arc when Paul Graham first released it. I still think it has potential, but that potential is limited by Paul’s interest level and available time. It’s been over 3 months since the last release and that was only a small incremental improvement. The forum seems dead, and the fact that Arc went through a 5 year blackout period makes me wonder whether it will be a dead-end language and a waste of valuable time.
  • Common Lisp: I am leaning toward a Lisp, so if Arc doesn’t pan out, Common Lisp would be a good fallback language. It’s much more mature with robust implementations. It doesn’t provide a nice batteries included experience though, and I’ve been reluctant to collect the necessary libraries from various sources to allow anything remotely similar to Ruby on Rails with respect to ease of development. I think it may have a greater long term potential though, so it may be worth the effort.
  • Scheme: The PLT web server may give me a head start on a Lisp based web site, and Arc is based on MZScheme, so it’s on the short list.
  • Haskell: I know very little Haskell (even less than Lisp which is not much), but I’m intrigued by many aspects of the language. GHC seems to be a great compiler that produces well performing programs. My initial impression is that it will take more effort to learn than a Lisp, but in terms of brain stretching, it has a lot to offer. There is a Haskell based web server available, but like a lot of fringe languages, it appears to be pretty rough around the edges.

I have a vacation coming up, so I think I’ll use some of the down time to do some research and make a decision. Look for the blog bifurcation to happen in the latter half of June. If you have any opinions on the matter, please add a comment :)

Tags: , , ,

Nice Fonts for GNU Emacs on Ubuntu Linux

February 7, 2008 in software | 6 comments

UPDATE 12/24/08: This article is now out of date. I just installed Ubuntu 8.10, and getting Emacs with nice fonts is now much easier:

  1. Install the emacs-snapshot-gtk package
  2. Edit ~/.Xresources to have
    Emacs.font: Bitstream Vera Sans Mono-10
  3. xrdb -merge ~/.Xresources

Before discussing how to get nice fonts for emacs, it might be reasonable to ask, “why emacs?” I haven’t fully answered that question myself, but had I not been able to get nice, readable fonts on emacs, I probably wouldn’t continue researching it. For the info on getting nice fonts to work, scroll down to “Nice Fonts” below.

After many years of using large IDEs to develop software, I switched to vim about a year and a half ago when I began developing with Ruby on Rails. Although the learning curve for vim was a bit steep, I quickly got to the point of being more productive with vim than I was with my previous IDE, and I’m continually learning features of vim that save me time and effort.

Ok, if vim is so great, why am I considering emacs? In a word, Lisp. Emacs, has great Lisp support. For the little bit of Lisp dabbling I’ve been doing, vim has been fine, but from what I’ve seen demonstrated with emacs and slime, I think it’s worth researching. Another important factor is that emacs is scripted with elisp, a dialect of Lisp. I’ve never taken the time to read up on vim scripting, but scripting emacs with elisp seems easy. Type in some elisp code into the scratch buffer, evaluate it, and it’s integrated immediately into emacs. I haven’t written any vim scripts in a year and a half, but within a few hours of researching emacs, I had implemented several elisp scripts (from source obtained online).

Here’s one to simulate the % command in vim which moves the cursor to the matching paren:

(defun match-paren (arg)
  "Go to the matching paren if on a paren; otherwise insert %."
  (interactive "p")
  (cond ((looking-at "\s(") (forward-list 1) (backward-char 1))
	((looking-at "\s)") (forward-char 1) (backward-list 1))
        (t (self-insert-command (or arg 1)))))

(global-set-key "%" 'match-paren)

Here’s one to simulate the vim o and O commands which open a new line either below or above the cursor and position the cursor properly indented, so you can start typing immediately. I use this quite often in vim:

(defun bja-open-line-below ()
  (interactive)
  (end-of-line)
  (open-line 1)
  (next-line 1)
  (indent-according-to-mode))

(global-set-key [?C-o] 'bja-open-line-below)

(defun bja-open-line-above ()
  (interactive)
  (beginning-of-line)
  (open-line 1)
  (indent-according-to-mode))

(global-set-key [?M-o] 'bja-open-line-above)

After my brief exposure to emacs, I think vim is more concise. In other words, it appears that vim can accomplish a given task with fewer keystrokes than emacs. I’m curious to see how hard it is to extend emacs to have some of the niceties I’m used to with vim. Maybe I can have the best of both worlds – the conciseness of vim and the extensibility and Lisp support of emacs. Lennart Borgman passed on a link to vimpulse.el, so I’ll take a look at it soon.

I swapped my caps-lock with my left control key a long time ago, so the emacs chording isn’t quite as much of a problem, but I still wonder if vim might be easier on the hands/wrists since it requires very little chording.

I know some famous lispers use vi(m) for Lisp development, so I don’t think emacs is a must-have. Also, if I end up using a commercial Lisp such as Lispworks or Allegro, I may consider returning to an IDE for lisp development. So, at this stage, I’m still very much a vim user who is researching emacs.

UPDATE:Well, sometime between the original post and now I became a die-hard GNU Emacs user, so I figured I’d update the post :)

Nice Fonts

But enough of that, how do you get nice fonts on emacs? I had heard that the new version of emacs (22) provided anti-aliased fonts, but apparently I was mistaken. I spent hours Googling and rebuilding emacs to no avail – quite a frustrating experience. Then I posted a question on the gnu.emacs.help usenet group and received a helpful reply in a few minutes which did the trick. Here’s the thread.

Here’s what I did:

cvs -z3 -d:pserver:anonymous@cvs.savannah.gnu.org:/sources/emacs co emacs
cd emacs
./configure --enable-font-backend --with-gif=no
make bootstrap
make
sudo make install

After that, I was able to use the ‘Bitstream Vera Sans Mono-10′ font, and it looks great!

emacs -r -fn "Bitstream Vera Sans Mono-10"

The -r flag is for reverse video. I much prefer a black background. After making emacs from the cvs sources, it reports its version as 23.0.60.2.

After editing my ~/.Xresources file to have the following line:

Emacs.font: Bitstream Vera Sans Mono-10

And running the command:

xrdb -merge ~/.Xresources

Emacs automatically uses that font at startup.

During my hours of Googling, I had seen the page with the correct information here. But in my haste, I read the statement, “Note: Since the emacs-unicode-2 branch which had the xft support is merged into trunk, the current page is obsolete.“, and somehow got the impression that the entire page was obsolete, but apparently that is not the case.*

Fortunately, the helpful folks on gnu.emacs.help set me straight – thanks guys!

*UPDATE: I edited the wiki page referenced above, so the “obsolete” notice is further down the page.

Tags: , , ,

« Older entries