Versus Common Lisp
While I have no specific goal (nor resources, probably) to implement the full Common Lisp specification, SLip is closer to Common Lisp than to other dialects. This page lists some fundamental differences.
Strings are immutable
Since JS strings are immutable, so are SLip strings. We could emulate all the Common Lisp “features” by boxing strings in a custom object, but I think that would reduce performance for no practical benefit.
Eval-always
As mentioned in implementation notes, while compiling a piece of code all toplevel expressions are evaluated in sequence.
No exact arithmetic
Integer and floating point precision is as good as your browser can do. There are no rational and no complex numbers.
No reader customization
For the time being you can't customize the reader. Even if that will be possible at some point, the API will probably be different from Common Lisp's.
No “debugger”
Debugging, for now, is painful. There's no step-by-step debugger, or stack frame inspector.
Lots more...
I'm pretty sure there are a lot more things we're missing, but most of
them could fall in the “library” section. For example we don't
have a pretty printer — correction 2025, we now have
one; a - correction 2025, LOOP
macroLOOP
has been implemented; and the format
function is
incomplete (though still quite useful). But most of this missing
functionality can be written in SLip itself, so it's less essential.
SLip
A Lisp environment for the browser.
Open the REPL!- Hacking (NEW)
- 9 minute screen cast (old)
- IDE information
- Implementation notes
- Versus Common Lisp
- Documentation
- Project at Github
Latest Lisp blog entries
- SLip news - more Common Lisp! (Oct 5)
- SLip — a Lisp system in your browser (Apr 12)
- A little JavaScript problem (Nov 25)
- QUEEN, chess, and writing fast Lisp code (Aug 29)