Re: static-vectors

Hello Herr Habs,

I am also beginner with LISP and I use CLISP
exclusively, and I could find ways to manage
installations of external systems or packages so
that it works for me.

CLISP is under development, even though the new
stable version have not been published for many
years.

Latest stable version is stable enough and works
well.

But you can always take the latest development
version which for my needs so far, works just as
well.

It is here:
https://gitlab.com/gnu-clisp/clisp

then you can also see that it is developed and at
what time.

You may contribute if you find any error or mistake.

On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 04:22:58PM +0100, C Habs wrote:
> > > quicklisp/software/static-vectors-v1.8.3/static-vectors.asd:
> > >       static-vectors does not support this Common Lisp implementation!
> > >
> > >
> > > Please excuse my ignorance; what is a 'static vector' and why is this
> > > a problem in CLISP and can it be that CLISP could support
> > > static-vector ?
> >
> > The "Requirements" section on https://github.com/fukamachi/woo
> > says that "Woo" currently
> > * runs on no other operating system than Linux
> > * runs on no other Common Lisp implementation than SBCL
> > * requires libev to be installed

Yes, I understand.

However, if you are beginner in LISP then why not
use some other web server solution but woo?

Maybe somebody on this list can help to make
static-vectors work on CLISP.

> > Woo is obviously a non-comforming Common Lisp program
> > but fails to say so on the GitHub page.

Yes, I find that also stupid, and I do not find it
"Common Lisp program" as long as it is not
"common" and cannot be used within other
conforming implementations of Common Lisp.

> > Conforming Common Lisp programs should run on *all*
> > Common Lisp implementations, not only on SBCL.

Absolutely yes, I agree.

That happens because some of authors focus only on
one implementation.

> The standardized Common Lisp is not enough for many purposes, first of all
> it lacks a FFI and networking; therefore all programs that need that rely
> on non-standard extensions.

That may be, I am not a specialist, but I know
that CLISP does have option for FFI, however maybe
the author of static-vectors did not look enough
into CLISP to make it work.

> Clisp is almost unmaintained and I - as well as most Lisp developers I know
> - simply don't use it and don't port our libraries to Clisp. I'm happy to
> accept patches to static-vectors that adds Clisp support but I'm not
> interested in doing any work on that.

Well I cannot agree on that, and it means
nothing. Obviously CLISP is under development and
what needs to be maintained if it is already well
conforming Common Lisp implementation?

So the statement like that is not specific. It
just means that the author did not look enough
into his own authorship, and he even said so.

> As new to Lisp/CLISP, as I said alluded to previously, this sort of
> perception seems to crop up more than perhaps it should for *common lisp*
> CLISP.  I like CLISP too (it shipped by default with my preference of Linux
> distro :-)  .  It is a real shame if people are developing things but
> perceive common lisp as lacking and therefore their offerings are for some
> extended common lisp that results in more exclusivity than the common.   I
> ramble, but there you go.

Yes those things happen.

However, what exactly do you try to accomplish?

I am using CLISP as CGI program, and it is already
very good and fast that way, it is compiled and
does what I want.

And I am using it under Nginx webserver.

-- 
Jean Louis

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
clisp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/clisp-list