gcl-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Gcl-devel] Re: "COMMON-LISP" package in GCL 2.5.0


From: Camm Maguire
Subject: Re: [Gcl-devel] Re: "COMMON-LISP" package in GCL 2.5.0
Date: 14 Aug 2002 17:54:24 -0400

Greetings!  I'm just about to commit a change to cvs which will
eliminate this package when not configuring with --enable-ansi.
Should be present in gcl Debian packages version >= 43.  Please let me
know if this removes the need for your patch.

Take care, 

Matt Kaufmann <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi again --
> 
> >> Should work, as Greg notes.  will become unnecessary if/when I escape
> >> the common-lisp package with the --enable-ansi configuration option.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> >> What platforms are supported via the other lisps you use?
> 
> As far as I know (and recall), if any of gcl, Allegro CL, cmu lisp, and clisp
> can be built on a given platform, then ACL2 can be built and run on top of 
> that
> Lisp.  We program in a relatively small subset of Common Lisp and use readtime
> conditionals where necessary.
> 
> -- Matt
>    Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden
>    From: Camm Maguire <address@hidden>
>    Date: 10 Aug 2002 14:51:46 -0400
> 
>    Greetings!
> 
>    Matt Kaufmann <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>    > Thanks.  So, probably it's the case that as long as the LISP package 
> exists, we
>    > can rename COMMON-LISP without breaking GCL.  Do I have that right?  That
>    > should be fine for purposes of ACL2, where we do something like this.
>    > 
> 
>    Should work, as Greg notes.  will become unnecessary if/when I escape
>    the common-lisp package with the --enable-ansi configuration option.
> 
>    > (let ((lisp-pkg (find-package "LISP")))
>    >   (when lisp-pkg
>    >     (rename-package "COMMON-LISP" "COMMON-LISP-renamed")
>    >     (let ((old-name (package-name lisp-pkg)) ; reuse old name, nicknames
>    >    (old-nicknames (package-nicknames lisp-pkg)))
>    >       (rename-package "LISP"
>    >                 old-name
>    >                 (cons "COMMON-LISP" old-nicknames)))))
>    > 
>    > >> (with the goal of a clean, multi-platform build of maxima and maybe
>    > >> acl2) ....
>    > 
>    > It would be great to know that ACL2 runs under GCL on a variety of 
> platforms!
> 
>    What platforms are supported via the other lisps you use?
> 
>    Take care,
> 
>    > If I can be of any assistance in helping you test ACL2, please let me 
> know.
>    > 
>    > Thanks --
>    > -- Matt
>    >    From: Gregory Wright <address@hidden>
>    >    Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden
>    >    Content-Type: text/plain
>    >    Date: 10 Aug 2002 12:07:43 -0400
>    > 
>    >    On Sat, 2002-08-10 at 11:33, Matt Kaufmann wrote:
>    >    > Thanks.  Will COMMON-LISP and LISP ultimately be the same package?  
> That is,
>    >    > will this form return true?
>    >    > 
>    >    > (eq (find-package "LISP") (find-package "COMMON-LISP"))
>    >    > 
>    > 
>    >    No, this should never be so. As gcl moves toward ansi common lisp, the
>    >    symbols in LISP should be moved to COMMON-LISP. Anything left over
>    >    (i.e., in gcl's LISP but not part of the 978 symbols of ansi
>    >    COMMON-LISP) should be moved into a compatibility package. The package
>    >    LISP should go away since it is a confusing remnant of the days when 
> the
>    >    language was specified by the CLtL book.
>    > 
>    >    But this brings up a good point---the moves toward ansi-fication are 
> in
>    >    conflict with getting the basic bugs out of gcl and reliable cross
>    >    platform builds.
>    > 
>    >    Which leads to a proposal: sometime soon, perhaps just after 2.5.0 is
>    >    released, we branch the cvs, with the branch being 2.5.x maintenance
>    >    (with the goal of a clean, multi-platform build of maxima and maybe
>    >    acl2) and a development branch headed for ansi compliance. The
>    >    development branch is allowed to break backward compatibility with 
> 2.5.x
>    >    and earlier.
>    > 
>    >    The development branch could still support special features or
>    >    compatibility modes but it would not be a _requirement_.
>    > 
>    >    What do people think?
>    > 
>    >    Best Wishes,
>    >    Greg
>    > 
>    > 
>    >    -- 
>    > 
>    >    Gregory Wright
>    >    Chief Technical Officer
>    >    PacketStorm Communications, Inc.
>    >    20 Meridian Road
>    >    Eatontown, New Jersey 07724
>    > 
>    >    1 732 544-2434 ext. 206
>    >    1 732 544-2437 [fax]
>    >    address@hidden
>    > 
>    > 
> 
>    -- 
>    Camm Maguire                                               address@hidden
>    ==========================================================================
>    "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens."  --  Baha'u'llah
> 
> 

-- 
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]