Re: fails to build with sbcl 0.9.11

Espen S Johnsen <[email protected]> writes:

> Peter De Wachter <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> clg 0.92 fails to build for me with sbcl 0.9.11 on amd64. Earlier
>> versions of sbcl work ok. I've attached a build log and a backtrace.
>
> Thanks, I hadn't noticed this because in my current development tree
> this bug wasn't triggered due to the gtk classes being defined in
> different order.
>
>> It seems this is the sbcl patch that broke clg:
>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.steel-bank.cvs/8116
>> If I revert that, clg works. I hope this is useful, I don't understand
>> this CLOS magic at all.
>
> This change to SBCL seem causes class finalization process to be done
> slightly differently than before, but the clg changes required were
> quite trivial.

Yes, sorry about that.  Would you mind expanding a bit about the
interaction of your code with class-finalization?  This is not an area
I'm comfortable with modifying -- there are very few test cases for
class finalization in SBCL, and I don't understand all the
interactions by any means; having more examples might help to
understand what's going on.

(As I understand it, class finalization is extremely underspecified,
even by AMOP standards; with the recent changes, SBCL finalizes very
eagerly: as soon as a class can be finalized, it will be.  By
contrast, Allegro finalizes very reluctantly; it will only finalize
when an instance of a class is created -- and won't finalize
subclasses or even superclasses.  Other implementations are in the
middle.)

Cheers,

Christophe


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642