Is there a sbcl logo floating around anywhere, that I can get my hands on? Thanks Sean -- -- The pen is mightier than the sword. Only if the sword is very short and the pen is very sharp. Terry Pratchett. ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf
Hi all I understand SBCL has threading support only for the x86 platform. I was wondering if there is threads development on any other platforms? Also, minus threads, is there any other multiple process options available on SBCL? sb-unix:unix-fork doesn't seem to be bound and I can find no way of calling a shell command as one might do in a scripting language. -- -- Regards, Robert Marlow ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf
Robert Marlow <bobstopper <at> australispro.com.au> writes:
> I can
> find no way of calling a shell command as one might do in a scripting
> language.
* (let* ((process (run-program "/bin/sh" '("-c" "ls -F /tmp") :output :stream))
(output (process-output process)))
(loop for line = (read-line output nil nil)
while line
do (format t "~S~%" line))
(process-wait process)
(values))
"a"
"a.patch"
"b"
"esrv500-debian="
"orbit-alexey/"
"whyfp.html"
"whyfp.zip"
--
--
Regards,
Alexey Dejneka
"Alas, the spheres of truth are less transparent than those of
illusion." -- L.E.J. Brouwer
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
(Continue reading)
Hey, thanks... that run-program is pretty powerfully designed. That
should pretty well cover anything I would plan on doing in terms of
multiple processes anyway I guess.
On Sun, 2003-09-14 at 13:15, Alexey Dejneka wrote:
> Robert Marlow <bobstopper <at> australispro.com.au> writes:
>
> > I can
> > find no way of calling a shell command as one might do in a scripting
> > language.
>
> * (let* ((process (run-program "/bin/sh" '("-c" "ls -F /tmp") :output :stream))
> (output (process-output process)))
> (loop for line = (read-line output nil nil)
> while line
> do (format t "~S~%" line))
> (process-wait process)
> (values))
> "a"
> "a.patch"
> "b"
> "esrv500-debian="
> "orbit-alexey/"
> "whyfp.html"
> "whyfp.zip"
>
> --
> Regards,
> Alexey Dejneka
>
(Continue reading)
Hello SBCL users and developers,
I found this (time (api)) test code to be around twenty times slower in
SBCL compared to CMUCL:
(declaim (optimize (safety 0) (speed 3)))
(declaim (start-block api))
(defun api ()
(loop for i of-type (double-float 0d0)
from 0d0 to 100000000d0
sum (fn-call i) of-type double-float))
(defun fn-call (float)
(sqrt float))
(declaim (end-block))
I am aware that support for this elegant form of block compilation has
been removed from SBCL. Does SBCL provide another way to achieve this
kind of block compilation? I have also noted that :ENTRY-POINTS for
:BLOCK-COMPILE in COMPILE-FILE appears to have been removed.
Thanks,
Adam
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
(Continue reading)
Adam Warner <lists <at> consulting.net.nz> writes:
> I found this (time (api)) test code to be around twenty times slower in
> SBCL compared to CMUCL:
>
> (declaim (optimize (safety 0) (speed 3)))
> (declaim (start-block api))
>
> (defun api ()
> (loop for i of-type (double-float 0d0)
> from 0d0 to 100000000d0
> sum (fn-call i) of-type double-float))
>
> (defun fn-call (float)
> (sqrt float))
>
> (declaim (end-block))
>
> I am aware that support for this elegant form of block compilation has
> been removed from SBCL. Does SBCL provide another way to achieve this
> kind of block compilation? I have also noted that :ENTRY-POINTS for
> :BLOCK-COMPILE in COMPILE-FILE appears to have been removed.
Away from my system, but
(declaim (inline fn-call) (optimize speed (safety 0)))
(defun fn-call (float)
(sqrt float))
(defun api ...)
should have the same effect. This isn't necessarily entirely
scalable to whatever real-world example motivates your question.
(Continue reading)
Hi Christophe Rhodes, >> I found this (time (api)) test code to be around twenty times slower in >> SBCL compared to CMUCL: >> >> (declaim (optimize (safety 0) (speed 3))) >> (declaim (start-block api)) >> >> (defun api () >> (loop for i of-type (double-float 0d0) >> from 0d0 to 100000000d0 >> sum (fn-call i) of-type double-float)) >> >> (defun fn-call (float) >> (sqrt float)) >> >> (declaim (end-block)) >> >> I am aware that support for this elegant form of block compilation has >> been removed from SBCL. Does SBCL provide another way to achieve this >> kind of block compilation? I have also noted that :ENTRY-POINTS for >> :BLOCK-COMPILE in COMPILE-FILE appears to have been removed. > > Away from my system, but > (declaim (inline fn-call) (optimize speed (safety 0))) > (defun fn-call (float) > (sqrt float)) > (defun api ...) > should have the same effect. This isn't necessarily entirely > scalable to whatever real-world example motivates your question.(Continue reading)
> In other words magically turning desired-non-globally-accessible
> function calls into LABELS:
Here's a bare and manual version of the functionality:
(defpackage :model1
(:use)
#.`(:import-from :cl
, <at> (let (list)
(do-external-symbols (symbol :cl)
(unless (eq symbol 'defun) (push symbol list)))
list)))
(in-package model1)
(defmacro defun (name lambda-list &body body)
`(eval-when (:compile-toplevel)
(cl:defun ,name ,lambda-list , <at> body)
(setf (get 'source ',name) '(,name ,lambda-list , <at> body))))
(defmacro insert-labels (functions &rest args)
`(labels ,(loop for fn in functions collect (get 'source fn))
, <at> args))
;;--------------------
;;Standard code begins
;;--------------------
(defun fn-call (float)
(sqrt float))
(Continue reading)
Hi,
I just downloaded the 0.8.3 i386 binary RPM and installed it, no problem.
Then I tried
$ sbcl-asdf-install getopt
and
$ sbcl-asdf-install CLSQL
Both failed, but for different reasons.
I've attached the output of each below.
Also,
* (require 'asdf-install)
fails too:
* (require 'asdf-install)
debugger invoked on condition of type READER-ERROR:
READER-ERROR at 2 (line 1, column 2) on #<FILE-STREAM
for "file \"/usr/lib/sbcl/asdf-install/asdf-install\""
{900E839}>:
no dispatch function defined for #\!
Within the debugger, you can type HELP for help. At any command prompt (within
the debugger or not) you can type (SB-EXT:QUIT) to terminate the SBCL
(Continue reading)
[Is this the right mailing list for ASDF-INSTALL? I hope so.] Hi! I've made my packages CL-PPCRE, CL-WHO, and HTML-TEMPLATE asdf-installable because, well, mostly because it was really easy. I just had to edit the CLiki page and provide a PGP signature. However, CL-GD, my latest little project, relies on the existence of external libraries (libgd plus a couple of supporting libraries). It also expects the user to compile some glue functions written in C before he/she can use it. Do you think it would make sense to make CL-GD asdf-installable as well? What would be the best way to do it? 1. I suppose it is possible to let ASDF take care of compiling the glue stuff[1]. I don't know how to do this but I think I can figure that out - maybe by looking at the CL-SQL sources. I wouldn't mind if someone provides an example, though... :) 2. CL-GD needs UFFI. How does ASDF-INSTALL cope with this? 3. Of course, there's still a lot that can go wrong - the user is on Solaris and doesn't have gcc, the user doesn't have libgd installed, the user does have libgd but hasn't installed, say, libfreetype, and so one. I suppose all of these will be caught at compile time, so maybe it's OK to just let the user run into this situation?(Continue reading)
RSS Feed10 | |
|---|---|
17 | |
8 | |
9 | |
4 | |
14 | |
10 | |
10 | |
12 | |
40 | |
13 | |
58 | |
16 | |
17 | |
22 | |
9 | |
21 | |
21 | |
25 | |
21 | |
38 | |
15 | |
28 | |
17 | |
31 | |
5 | |
31 | |
17 | |
19 | |
41 | |
33 | |
43 | |
31 | |
43 | |
24 | |
8 | |
59 | |
55 | |
44 | |
26 | |
31 | |
46 | |
59 | |
52 | |
35 | |
48 | |
58 | |
29 | |
15 | |
18 | |
31 | |
33 | |
83 | |
42 | |
52 | |
19 | |
52 | |
24 | |
25 | |
1 | |
13 | |
28 | |
17 | |
36 | |
59 | |
9 | |
16 | |
11 | |
24 | |
31 | |
31 | |
60 | |
40 | |
50 | |
37 | |
41 | |
69 | |
20 | |
39 | |
51 | |
23 | |
11 | |
29 | |
19 | |
26 | |
19 | |
37 | |
45 | |
24 | |
30 | |
17 | |
28 | |
26 | |
33 | |
37 | |
69 | |
65 | |
39 | |
32 | |
24 | |
27 | |
80 | |
20 | |
38 | |
14 | |
23 | |
15 | |
18 | |
69 | |
21 | |
15 | |
32 | |
19 | |
14 | |
3 | |
27 | |
28 | |
3 | |
10 | |
27 | |
14 | |
4 | |
5 | |
8 | |
3 | |
2 | |
5 |
