[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gcl-devel] How to submit GCL patches
From: |
Jerry James |
Subject: |
Re: [Gcl-devel] How to submit GCL patches |
Date: |
Thu, 29 Jan 2009 14:35:29 -0700 |
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 6:20 PM, Camm Maguire <address@hidden> wrote:
> Greetings, and please excuse my absence of late. I have recently left
> my job of 17 years, and am confronting a new situation of chronic
> illness in my family. I am also currently without an effective method
> for dealing with with the massive amount of spam I receive each day
> from debian.org. I'm wedded to emacs, and so am trying to get gnus to
> filter effectively.
I'm very sorry to hear about the chronic illness situation. I wish
you and your family all the best in dealing with that.
I used Emacs + Gnus and then XEmacs + Gnus starting about 1994 up
until a couple of years ago. I used spamassassin to filter my email
during the last couple of years that I used Gnus. Even with constant
training, it never worked very well. A couple of years ago, for a
variety of reasons, I moved almost exclusively to gmail. I do get the
occasional false negative or false positive, but both are pretty rare.
> I'd like to launch another GCL burst now if possible. I have a local
> tree which greatly accelerates the new automatic inlining of 2.7.0,
> primarily by storing precompiled C strings in addition to compressed
> lisp code for each compiled function. There are remaining niggles,
> primarily getting the labels and variable numbers to be adjustable.
> Finalizing the inlining policy, and hopefully cleaning up the
> remaining ansi issues, are all that stand in the way of 2.7.0.
>
> I'm thrilled to welcome new contributers! Needless to say, all GCL
> matters are up for consultation -- the more minds the better.
I think I have some things to offer this project and would be
delighted to have a chance to contribute.
> Kindly give me a few days to get this email situation sorted out once
> and for all, then perhaps we can start discussing new issues of
> substance.
Sounds great!
Regards,
--
Jerry James
http://loganjerry.googlepages.com/