On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 10:30:26PM +0200, Pierre R. Mai wrote:
> Alexey Dejneka <adejneka@...> writes:
> > Hello,
> > Christophe Rhodes <csr21@...> writes:
> > > Regarding the release of sbcl-0.7.5 sometime around the end of the
> > > weekend, I was wondering if anyone had strong opinions over which of
> > > bugs 140 and 176 should be present, since, unfortunately, it seems that
> > > "neither" is not a realistic option.
> > 140. 176 was very unpleasant.
> FWIW, I tend to agree, and I'll probably reverse the fix in the CMUCL
> cvs repo, until I find the time to investigate ways of fixing the 176
> lossage. It's probably an easy fix, once I've wrapped my head around
> it, but currently there's little chance of my finding the needed
> couple of hours to do it right...
> In any case, I'd not want to
> release cmucl 18e/19a (or whatever it's going to be) with either of
> the two bugs present, but I think the situation for SBCL differs,
> since you release much more frequently, and you're still below version
> 1.0.0 ;)
Be that as it may, I've reversed the change in sbcl-0.7.4.42, so
sbcl-0.7.5 should release without bug 176.
Jesus College, Cambridge, CB5 8BL +44 1223 510 299
http://www-jcsu.jesus.cam.ac.uk/~csr21/ (defun pling-dollar
(str schar arg) (first (last +))) (make-dispatch-macro-character #\! t)
(set-dispatch-macro-character #\! #\$ #'pling-dollar)