Re: [clisp:clisp] 2 new commits to clisp
Bruno Haible <[email protected]> Mon, 22 Jan 2018 16:46:05 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.lisp.clisp.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <2925406.4LcUtXM1U5@omega> |
Sam Steingold wrote: > > * CLISP - an ANSI Common Lisp Mercurial repository <[email protected]> [2018-01-20 08:21:03 +0000]: > > > > ## Branch: default > > > > syscalls: Make this module work with DYNAMIC_MODULES. > > > > By Bruno Haible on 01/20/2018 08:19 > > [**View > > Changes**](https://sourceforge.net/p/clisp/clisp/ci/f7c179f9907ab70c389b0ff245fe4cd0f22b801d/) > > Why?! What's the point? As explained in <https://sourceforge.net/p/clisp/bugs/725/>, I got an error when running 'clisp-link run' with a couple of modules. > syscalls is a base module and is _always_ built statically and linked > into the base link set. I could also have used 'clisp-link run boot syscalls rawsock'. And we should be able to move some modules from BASE_MODULES to MODULES when we like. > it should never be compiled dynamically. No. The lesson learned should be: ** Never use $(CC) on a source file without $(CPPFLAGS). ** ** Never use $(CC) without $(CFLAGS), even when linking. ** > also, are you sure that volatile is equivalent to -O0 for all compilers? Yes. The effects of 'volatile' are not formally standardized, but for decades, they have the informal meaning of "don't optimize these memory accesses". Bruno ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ clisp-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/clisp-devel