News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Janet for Mortals. Parent comment

Re:Janet for Mortals by vindarel on Friday March 31, 2023 @01:03PM (#35389993)
> common lisp can be statically compiled, but their binaries (at least with sbcl) can get pretty big [1], even with compression.

My SBCL binaries are ±28MB, with the complete Lisp runtime and debugger (cool, I can eval and load configuration files or connect to a remote app) and dozens of dependencies, including a web server.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Janet for Mortals by djha-skin on Friday March 31, 2023 @01:18PM (#35390112)
I could get it down to 10 with the `:compression` option on[1] for hello world. Perhaps this is the option you use? The compression didn't hurt the run time much as I recall. It's the reason why I'm still okay with common lisp for this use case.

1: http://www.sbcl.org/manual/#Function-sb_002dext-save_002dlis...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Janet for Mortals by vindarel on Friday March 31, 2023 @01:25PM (#35390193)
absolutely, I use SBCL compression (following this recipe: https://lispcookbook.github.io/cl-cookbook/scripting.html#bu... that boils down to save-lisp-and-die ultimately). Start-up times are still below the 50ms for me.
[ Parent | on HN ]