Line-based Lisp Editing
Read on the website: Not all environments have Lisp-aware structural editing. Some are only line-oriented. How does one go about editing Lisp line-by-line?
Read on the website: Not all environments have Lisp-aware structural editing. Some are only line-oriented. How does one go about editing Lisp line-by-line?
Read on the website: ed is a stupid simple text editor. sed is a nice streaming text processing tool. Why would one even want to use ed for anything, let alone for text processing if there's sed?
Read on the website: Threading macros make Lisp-family languages much more readable. Other languages too, potentially! Except… other languages don’t have macros. How do we go about enabling threading “macros” there?
Read on the website: Text is a universal medium. And yet we try to prevent users of our UIs from using it. Let’s not.
Read on the website: I am an ed(1) fan. Naturally, I have a lot of scripts and implementations handy. Here are some.
Read on the website: Lisp REPLs are a good tool, but some consider it too rigid. Which leads to abundance of proxy REPLs. Except… you don’t need them!
Read on the website: Just stop artificially restricting yourself to bad software.
Read on the website: Plaintext emails are slowly becoming an artifact of the past. Still, there’s a lot interesting things about plaintext emails. Including... plaintext-only formatting!
Read on the website: Being stupid is a stigma. But it's also a way of doing my job well or destroying the system the job perpetuates. Come be stupid with me!
Read on the website: Logical pathnames are both a useful and obscure feature of Common Lisp. Here I’m trying to figure them out.
Read on the website: We keep losing context and computation when running programs. But we don't have to. Let’s see how this lost compute can be avoided.
Read on the website: Algorithms are all the rage in tech. And yet, they are useless unless you use them as black boxes. Better disseminate explanations—they are much more understandable and reproducible.
Read on the website: Any programming system needs a ways to aggregate values. Be it with structures, arrays, or closures. Lambda Calculus has these ways, so let's see what's there.
Read on the website: As GUI complexity grows, transparency plummets. Any way to fix that?
Read on the website: Designing programming languages is hard. But does it have to be this way?
Read on the website: Embrace ugly code. Maintain ugly code. Write ugly code.
Read on the website: Tarot is nice. It's showing us some archetypes and allowing to create stories. But are these stories as diverse as we are? No, and here're some simple NLP approaches to learning why.
Read on the website: LLMs and Vibe Coding are there. But why? Because our tech is not that advanced and we're disempowered by it. Make tech not suck, and you'll need no LLMs.
Read on the website: Lambda Calculus is a simple computation model that's easy to port to any language with functions. Probably? Hopefully? Actually, there are some problems when mapping from LC to programming. Here are some, with ways to cope.
Read on the website: With great generic functions comes great responsibility of making them readable and maintainable.