HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
dylan-lang
opendylan
Dylan2013–2024
dylan-lang / opendylan

opendylan

Open Dylan compiler and IDE

6Distinct people
9Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
503GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Open Dylan compiler and IDE

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 11:00:58 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year9 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2013-07-11 08:05:04 UTC to 2024-04-24 19:02:32 UTC.

0122013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments20132014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments20182019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2024

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20132013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202
20142014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20152015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20162016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

2 sources
Macros unfortunately make themselves most useful in cases that don't lend themselves to short snippets. My favorite example involves looking at some real code. Compare how to add a new intrinsic to LLVM: http://llvm.org/docs/ExtendingLLVM.html versus how to do it for SBCL: http://pvk.ca/Blog/Lisp/hacking_SSE_intrinsics-part_1.html. Look at how SBCL's x86-64 backend defines the x86-64 register set and specifies what kind of values can go in what registers: https://github.com/sbcl/sbcl/blob/master/src/compiler/x86-64.... Compare that to the equivalent for LLVM: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/lib/Target/X8.... The register descriptions are written in a very similar, declarative, way, except the SBCL code uses macros built into the language while the LLVM code uses a separate tool called TableGen that generates C++ code from t
Read the rest
he declarative descriptions. Using a separate tool means complicating the build process, having an ad-hoc parser/expander that can be a source of bugs, losing access to compiler facilities that allow you to step through the expansions and look at the expanded code, etc. If you can't get through the prefix syntax, look at how the OpenDylan compiler uses a macro to define the x86 instruction set: https://github.com/dylan-lang/opendylan/blob/master/sources/... Also see the x86-64 assembler I wrote in Common Lisp: https://github.com/rayiner/amd64-asm/blob/master/encoders.li.... Specifically, lines 374-504, 621+. Each instruction description basically specifies a list of alternative patterns that are matched against the assembly source. When a pattern matches, it is handed off to a compiled function that generates the actual encoded bytes. That function is automatically generated at compile-time from the declarative list of patterns. Not exactly brilliant code like you'll find in SBCL, but in a couple of weekends I was getting bit-for-bit identical assembly to YASM over a substantial subset of the instruction set. Part of the testsuite uses the same instruction descriptions that are used to generate the encoder: https://github.com/rayiner/amd64-asm/blob/master/testsuite.l... (Line 128).
In Lisp for C++ programmers

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.