Re: [Gcl-devel] conditions/clos/gcl unified build patch and instructions.

[Camm Maguire]

Greetings!

"Vadim V. Zhytnikov" <address@hidden> writes:

> Camm Maguire wrote:
> 
> > Greetings!
> >
> 
> Well Common Lisp in general doesn't look like compact system -
> hundreds of  bult-in functions and symbols.  Such stuff could not
> have small footprint.  On the other hand it seems that now
> CL is the only Lisp which (a) is standardized, (b) is alive
> (many real users, vast codebase).  There were attempts to
> standardize and promote other much smaller and compact
> Lisps (e.g. so called Standard Lisp).  Probably in vain.

OK

> 
> Moving large portion of the program into shared library is great
> idea
> bu I worry that it is far beyond our immediate goals.  Is it to
> accomplish?
> I really have no idea.

Indeed, nor do I.  Thought ecls did this, but their binary is not
dynamically linked against anything that looks like a lisp runtime.  I
do think they put the lisp runtime in a static lib.  My question is
that if it was shared, would it be effective, as the lisp heap would
change with use, and would duplicate the relevant pages in any
copy-on-write shared memory layout.

> 
> I think that GCL will start attracting users other than Maxima's
> ones as soon as
> (a) some reasonable level of ANSI CL compliance is achieved;
> (b) GCL portability is improved.
> So we are on the right track ;-) !
> 
> >
> > Better than autoloading as needed at runtime?
> 
> Please forgive my ignorance but does GCL have any autoloding
> machinery already?  I mean that some portion of code foo resides
> in
> extrenal *.o file which is automatically loaded only when
> we call (foo ...).
> 

Yes.  Check out the tkl.o!  Of course, we're trying to make sure it
works in another thread :-).

Take care,

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