> For ages I couldn't figure out how exactly I would be able to use Quicklisp libraries to create something, and then create an executable from the source code.
If you use SBCL, which is by far the best CL implementation, it's in the manual under "Generating Executables" [1].
It directs you to this [2] which is basically a single function that you call:
Function: save-lisp-and-die [sb-ext] core-file-name &key
toplevel executable save-runtime-options purify root-
structures environment-name compression
Save a "core image", i.e. enough information to restart a
Lisp process later in the same state, in the file of the
specified name. Only global state is preserved: the stack
is unwound in the process.
<more, detailed, documentation snipped>
What is hard about this? It's literally 10 seconds of work.
I am not picking on you, since others run into similar issues, that are completely and utterly trivial, which makes me wonder if they have been conditioned not to bother looking things up in a manual anymore and want things to simply fall in line with their expectations.
I am also a Smalltalk user and I frequently observe the same behavior in that domain. New users run into trivial problems that take less than a minute to solve (for the absolute beginner) and give up immediately. I'm almost convinced that there is some sort of psychological effect that comes into play when the task at hand is very dissimilar to what one is used to.
Image-based languages like Common Lisp and Smalltalk offer tremendous productivity gains but they're also totally unlike anything else out there in many ways. So they require upfront effort, before one truly "gets it", that includes someone willing to suspend their preconceptions and look at things with 'zen mind, beginners mind'. I think it's fair to say that most programmers today are incapable of doing that. Maybe they're just wired for immediate rewards and/or the overall dumbing down of the domain is also making them dumber. Cybernetic feedback loops are like that ..
If you use SBCL, which is by far the best CL implementation, it's in the manual under "Generating Executables" [1].
It directs you to this [2] which is basically a single function that you call:
What is hard about this? It's literally 10 seconds of work.I am not picking on you, since others run into similar issues, that are completely and utterly trivial, which makes me wonder if they have been conditioned not to bother looking things up in a manual anymore and want things to simply fall in line with their expectations.
I am also a Smalltalk user and I frequently observe the same behavior in that domain. New users run into trivial problems that take less than a minute to solve (for the absolute beginner) and give up immediately. I'm almost convinced that there is some sort of psychological effect that comes into play when the task at hand is very dissimilar to what one is used to.
Image-based languages like Common Lisp and Smalltalk offer tremendous productivity gains but they're also totally unlike anything else out there in many ways. So they require upfront effort, before one truly "gets it", that includes someone willing to suspend their preconceptions and look at things with 'zen mind, beginners mind'. I think it's fair to say that most programmers today are incapable of doing that. Maybe they're just wired for immediate rewards and/or the overall dumbing down of the domain is also making them dumber. Cybernetic feedback loops are like that ..
[1] http://www.sbcl.org/manual/#Generating-Executables
[2] http://www.sbcl.org/manual/#Function-sb_002dext_003asave_002...