[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gcl-devel] conditions/clos/gcl unified build patch and ins

From: Camm Maguire
Subject: Re: [Gcl-devel] conditions/clos/gcl unified build patch and instructions.
Date: 17 Jun 2002 09:07:00 -0400

Hi Vadim!

"Vadim V. Zhytnikov" <address@hidden> writes:

> Fine, now at least I understand the difference - I tried to build
> maxima 5.9.0-cvs. I'll take a look at 5.6 tomorrow.
> But do we really want to maintain gcl 2.5.0 compatible with
> maxima 5.6?  We have 2.4 branch for it.  In fact official Maxima 5.6
> is not very much stabler than current Maxima cvs.

Indeed.  But I'd really like both gcl branches to build both maxima
branches.   People have different ideas of 'stable' :-).

>   > 1)  Do we want CLOS to be an autoloadable option?
>   >
>   > 2)  Do we want CLOS to be a configure '--enabled' option?
>   >
> I'm not certain about autoloading. Is it time consuming to implement?

Might not be so.  Just have to follow the tkl example, I think.  But
perhaps not the highest priority.  I don't think lisp users seem to
find the memory issue a big deal (surprisingly to me).

> If yes then we can do it later. Maybe it is good idea to have some
> --enable configure option to build either old style gcl
> (no clsc, no pcl, LISP and USER packages) or gcl with new packages
> layout including pcl, clcs, COMMON-LISP ...

OK, you've probably noticed that I committed a modification of your
patch.  We really need to think about the makefiles some more, but I
think what is in there works.  --disable-ansi gives the old
traditional CLtL1 image.

> I just realised that also that presently the patch does some nasty things
> with saved_gcl images. First unixport/raw_gcl is created, then
> we use it to compile files in /lsp directory and to build
> /unixport/saved_gcl. Then it is used to compile and build
> /pcl/saved_gcl. Then this image is used to compile and build
> final /clcs/saved_gcl. And finally /clcs/saved_gcl is copied
> into /unixport/saved_gcl. We should not do the last step!
> It breaks make logic completely. If we modify some .lsp file in
> /lsp and make make then modified file compiles with this final
> saved_gcl.

Hmm ... not sure I understand this.  I agree that the overloading of
the meaning unixport/saved_gcl is bad, but what about renaming the
initial (original) unixport/saved_gcl to unixport/saved_trad_gcl, as I
just committed?  Its OK to rebuild .lsp files with the final big
saved_gcl, right?

In any case, I view all of this as preliminary at best.  Having so
many saved_gcl's around, each with a specific, hard-coded, but
arbitrary name, is really ugly.  But it seems to be working now, so we
can put this on the todo list...

>   > 3)  CLOCC test suite results with this build?
> It still stops abnormally in several places. The rest of
> tests passes producing enormous number of non ansi
> features. We have a lot of work to do ;-)

:-(  Awaiting your guidance on how to proceed here.

>   > Shall we import that
>   >     tree too?
> Maybe. Do CLOCC people work actively on ansi-test? Probably not.
> So maybe it can be imported to have it near at hand for our convenience.

OK, will import.

>   >
>   >
> Before committing all this stuff to GCL CVS several things must be done:
> 1) Ensure that Maxima 5.9.0 CVS builds and passes all tests.


> 2) The same for Maxima 5.6 (I'm not sure do we really need this?).

I think we do.

> 3) Understand what is the purpose of functions which was 
> shadowing-imported from CONDITIONS. Are they OK?
> What the difference from older versions?
> This is probably directly related to the broken
> Maxima's errcatch.

OK, if I can get some time, I'll try some experiments with 5.9.  But
it appears you are closer to the solution here than I am.  I haven't
even read the spec on shadowing-import.

> 4) Take a closer look nonANSIines which ansi-test
> reveals.


Thanks for your help!

> Best wishes,
> Vadim

Camm Maguire                                            address@hidden
"The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens."  --  Baha'u'llah

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]