LAID (was: python libs v lisp coolness?

[mike420 at ziplip.com]

Peter Hansen wrote in <3FA264D6.FAAB5FE3 at engcorp.com>:

> "Bradd W. Szonye" wrote:
>> 
>> > mike420 at ziplip.com writes:
>> [joke snipped by Mr Burdick]
>> 
>> Thomas F. Burdick <tfb at famine.OCF.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
>> > For those of you who haven't noticed yet, this is a troll whose "name"
>> > is a wack allusion to smoking marijuana.  Ignore it.
>> 
>> You may want to develop your "telling the difference between a troll and
>> a joke" skills.

He just needs to get LAID.

> Bradd, note the crossposting, which we're all continuing mercilessly.
> mike420 is a known troll, and whether or not he posts a joke from time
> to time, that doesn't change what Thomas said, nor the relevance of his
> advice.  Until mike420 shapes up (primarily by ceasing this endless
> crossposting 

"endless crossposting", heh? Let's see:

<Weekly statistics for comp.lang.lisp as of 10/26/03>

Top 10 Crossposters
===================

Articles  Address
--------  -------

     137  Pascal Costanza <costanza at web.de>
      81  Joachim Durchholz <joachim.durchholz at web.de>
      70  "Marshall Spight" <mspight at dnai.com>
      55  prunesquallor at comcast.net
      51  Matthias Blume <find at my.address.elsewhere>
      38  Dirk Thierbach <dthierbach at gmx.de>
      29  Jon S. Anthony <j-anthony at rcn.com>
      26  Erann Gat <spammers_must_die at jpl.nasa.gov>
      26  Brian McNamara! <gt5163b at prism.gatech.edu>
      22  "Andrew Dalke" <adalke at mindspring.com>


Do you see any "wack" allusions to smoking marijuana here, you
lying bitch? If I cross-post something, nobody puts a gun to
your head making you cross-post. If some egos are bigger than
their owners, it's their problem.

If you want to discuss cross-posting F-up2 a.t.

> which is only done to stir up animosity so he can watch
> the flamefests), it's probably a good idea for most people to ignore
> anything he posts.
> 
> -Peter

To others: my post may have been funny, but I meant it literally
as well. Various languages do need to develop one LAID, write LAIDs
for external libraries instead wrapping them in a specific language,
and then auto-generate foreign-function interface code automatically.

This is really about data-driven programming and higher productivity.

My original message follows for your refererence:

Joe Marshall <prunesquallor at comcast.net> wrote 
in <he1qryba.fsf at comcast.net>:

> Kenny Tilton <ktilton at nyc.rr.com> writes:
> 
>> I don't know.  Maybe I'm wrong. If Lisp is such a great language and
>> people love it so much, how come they don't write any code?
> 
> Between python bashing and attempting pull static typer's heads out
> of their asses, who has the time?

(By the way is it "static typist" or "static typer" ?)

Lispers need to cooperate with others on libraries. Maybe a Consortium of
Underdog Dynamically-Typed Languages needs to be started. Underdog 
languages are more interested in libraries and cooperation.

For each library, a language-agnostic interface description (in
LAID language, of course) should be generated by porters, so that 
later FFIs could be produced for each language automatically. This 
is the opposite (and complementary to) SWIG: SWIG auto-generates dumb
interface information and needs a lot of human post-work for each 
specific language.

"Are you guys having trouble with that GTK lib? - No, we got LAID!"