Re: [Gcl-devel] RE: [Axiom-developer] Possible GCL 2.6.7 for axiom

[Camm Maguire]

Greetings!

"Page, Bill" <address@hidden> writes:

> On Tuesday, April 26, 2005 10:16 AM Camm Maguire wrote:
> 
> > Hi Tim!  Great conference!
> 
> I second that!
> 
> > Here's my take home understanding of the remaining issues
> > re: gcl/axiom:
> >
> > 1) reenable run-process
> > 2) display images in tcl/tk
> > 3) tcl/tk working in windows
> > 4) Windows socket workaround for sman/hypertex/graphics
> 
> This is consistent with my recollection of our discussions
> during the Axiom sprint session. And I am willing to help
> with testing and debugging on the Windows platform.
> 

Great!

> But we should be clear I think, that this is not necessarily
> the shortest path to a fully functioning version of Axiom on
> Windows. The linux version of Axiom does not now use tcl/tk
> for Graphics and Hypertex, i.e. those parts of Axiom that are
> not already ported to Microsoft Windows. Instead these currently
> depend directly on the X windows libraries. These should perhaps
> be re-implemented in tcl/tk linux first before attempting the
> port to Windows.
> 

Good point.  While I haven't looked recently at the code, my
understanding is that sman and its subprocesses are written in C.  The
shortest path, then, IMHO, is simply to translate the xlib calls
therein into equivalent versions on native windows, presuming we have
the expertise somewhere.  Next, I would say, is the cygwin idea you
propose below.  If either of these can be worked out, this would give
us breathing space to later do all of this from within lisp in
whatever fashion appears best.

Let me go on record that I defer completely to Mike Thomas' opinions
as to the superiority of the existing mingw work over cygwin from a
technical point of view.  And there is a lot to be said for unity,
epsecially when resources are so limited.  So I much prefer the xlib
translation route described above.  We could even use such work in
xgcl, a lisp interface to xlib included in the distribution.

With all this said, GCL on cygwin is likely quite easy -- the biggest
obstacles are that I will not allow anyone to bother Mike Thomas about
this (:-)), and no other serious GCL developer works on Windows at the
moment.  It would therefore require a dedicated volunteer to patiently
document the progress of the port on address@hidden, and respond to
remote email help/instructions, most likely from me.  The only real
advantages of cygwin are 1) quite a few people seem to use it and 2)
it presents a simpler migration path from Linux.  But we should again
only turn here if no one knows how to write C graphics on windows.



> Because of this X windows dependency the shortest path,
> though admittedly not necessarily the best path, for fully
> implementing Axiom on Windows would probably be to use Cygwin.
> Currently GCL on windows uses MinGW instead of Cygwin to
> compile to native Windows but unlike Cygwin MinGW does not
> provided an X windows compatible environment.
> 
> I think using native Windows applications on Windows is a
> wothwhile target but it is sometimes hard for applications
> that originate on linux/Unix.
> 
> In principle it is possible to continue to compile AXIOMsys
> as a native Windows application and to run the Hypertex and
> Graphics components of Axiom under Cygwin. This would make
> it unnecessary to convert any already working code to tcl/tk.
> As I understand it, these additional components of Axiom
> currently only require a Unix-compatible C programming
> environment. So all we would need for this alternative is
> step 4) above - socket compatibility between the current
> native Windows version of GCL and the additional C code
> compiled under Cygwin.
> 
> Of course there are drawbacks. Using *both* MSYS/MinGW and
> Cygwin under Windows would further complicate the Windows
> build environment for Axiom. Currently there is no Cygwin
> version of GCL. Further, the X windows user interface under
> Cygwin might seem a little awkward for some Microsoft
> Windows users. But it should still be possible to prepare an
> auto-installation binary distribution that would make much
> of this transparent for users who are not interested in
> building Axiom from source.
> 
> >
> > These might go into a quick 2.6.7 GCL release.
> 
> However perhaps there are other reasons which would also
> motivate the development of GCL tcl/tk on Microsoft Windows.
> 

Yes, these broader lisp graphics questions I'll defer to my next
post. 


> > 
> > 5) axiom configure script
> > 
> 
> Yes! I think that would be a great step forward. I think
> Axiom should conform more closely to the de facto norm
> for building open source software.
>
> Regards,
> Bill Page.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gcl-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcl-devel
> 
> 
> 

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