Re: CLISP EMACS SWANK remote connection crash

C Habs <[email protected]> writes:

> Thank you for your time being invested; much appreciated. I received some
> comments on the 32bit, suggesting as it was 32bit, it might not be worth
> any one's extended time to sort and just move to 64bit platform asap, as
> that seemed to work without issue.  I can see the point on moving from
> 32bit, but I don't agree entirely as there are some very useful 32bit
> computers stilll out there and it would be nice to know at which point the
> coding caused issues just on 32bit.

I hear that a lot. The thing is, there is a bug in the code that
shows up on 32-bit systems, or at least x86. It might also mean the
bug can show up on other systems under certain conditions. Running on
a different architecture can be an effective means of exposing bugs
(there are many examples of that in the history of OpenBSD ports).

I also think CLISP can have an effective niche in 32-bit embedded
systems, as it is the only Free Software Common Lisp implementation
currently being developed that has very low memory requirements.
There are too many other Common Lisp implementations that are better
supported and produce faster code on 64-bit systems, where their
memory and compilation time overhead is not a problem.

--
Vladimir Sedach
Software engineering services in Los Angeles https://oneofus.la


_______________________________________________
clisp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/clisp-list