Gamedev in Lisp. Part 2: Dungeons and Interfaces

Re:Gamedev in Lisp. Part 2: Dungeons and Interfaces by medo-bear on Friday October 18, 2024 @02:23AM (#41876808)

You can also express LOOP constructs in terms of DO. However if you were to construct a more exotic iterator that is not so straight forward in LOOP (beware of edge cases), I think it is more reasonable to pick DO. I think also that your example illustrates this.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gamedev in Lisp. Part 2: Dungeons and Interfaces by lispm on Friday October 18, 2024 @02:55AM (#41876971)

I would miss the in-order collects, actually collect/maximize/... features, destructuring of lists, direct type declarations, ...

I also find DO not easy to read and understand.

The code from above I would actually write in LOOP as

    (loop for a from 1 upto 5
          and b = 10 then (* b 1.5)
          collect (* a b) into c
          finally (return (list a b c)))

I find that to be readable.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gamedev in Lisp. Part 2: Dungeons and Interfaces by medo-bear on Friday October 18, 2024 @03:44AM (#41877175)

Of course to each their own. I like LOOP a lot actually when I need to do something familiar, however for something unfamiliar DO is often my choice. It also serves as a caution to tread and think carefully when I return to the code. Sometimes, after a while, I realise how to do the DO construct succintly with LOOP

[ Parent | on HN ]