Lisp is the world's greatest programming language---or so its proponents think. The structure of Lisp makes it easy to extend the language or even to implement entirely new dialects without starting from scratch. Overall, the evolution of Lisp has been guided more by institutional rivalry, one-upsmanship, and the glee born of technical cleverness that is characteristic of the "hacker culture" than by sober assessments of technical requirements. Nevertheless this process has eventually produced both an industrialstrength programming language, messy but powerful, and a technically pure dialect, small but powerful, that is suitable for use by programming-language theoreticians. We pick up where McCarthy's paper in the first HOPL conference left off. We trace the development chronologically from the era of the PDP-6, through the heyday of Interlisp and MacLisp, past the ascension and decline of special purpose Lisp machines, to the present era of standardization activities. We then examine...

Today’s system programmers go to great lengths to extend the languages in which they program. For instance, system-specific compilers find errors in Linux and other systems, and add support for specialized control flow to Qt and event-based programs. These compilers are difficult to build and cannot always understand each other’s language changes. However, they can greatly improve code understandability and correctness, advantages that should be accessible to all programmers. We describe an extension-oriented compiler for C called xoc. An extension-oriented compiler, unlike a conventional extensible compiler, implements new features via many small extensions that are loaded together as needed. Xoc gives extension writers full control over program syntax and semantics while hiding many compiler internals. Xoc programmers concisely define powerful compiler extensions that, by construction, can be combined; even some parts of the base compiler, such as GNU C compatibility, are structured as extensions. Xoc is based on two key interfaces. Syntax patterns allow extension writers to manipulate language fragments using concrete syntax. Lazy computation of attributes allows extension writers to use the results of analyses by other extensions or the core without needing to worry about pass scheduling. Extensions built using xoc include xsparse, a 345-line extension that mimics Sparse, Linux’s C front end, and xlambda, a 170line extension that adds function expressions to C. An evaluation of xoc using these and 13 other extensions shows that xoc extensions are typically more concise than equivalent extensions written for conventional extensible compilers and that it is possible to compose extensions.

Lisp is the world’s greatest programming language—or so its proponents think. The structure of Lisp makes it easy to extend the language or even to implement entirely new dialects without starting from scratch. Overall, the evolution of Lisp has been guided more by institutional rivalry, one-upsmanship, and the glee born of technical cleverness that is characteristic of the “hacker culture ” than by sober assessments of technical requirements. Nevertheless this process has eventually produced both an industrialstrength programming language, messy but powerful, and a technically pure dialect, small but powerful, that is suitable for use by programming-language theoreticians. We pick up where McCarthy’s paper in the first HOPL conference left off. We trace the development chronologically from the era of the PDP-6, through the heyday of Interlisp and MacLisp, past the ascension and decline of special purpose Lisp machines, to the present era of standardization activities. We then examine the technical evolution of a few representative language features, including both some notable successes and some notable failures, that illuminate design issues that distinguish Lisp from other