Steel Bank Common Lisp

<emufer@...> wrote: 
> A somewhat shalow google search doesnt give back anything
> obvious, but at the same time it is hard to believe that
> something like this has not been noticed previously.

Please have a look at the "Command Line Options" chapter in the SBCL
manual. --core is a runtime option, and must thus come before all
toplevel options (like --userinit).

-- 
Juho Snellman

Yes.

 http://www.sbcl.org/manual/Command-Line-Options.html#Command-Line-Options

--core is a runtime option. --userinit is a toplevel option. 

Cheers,

  -- Nikodemus              Schemer: "Buddha is small, clean, and serious."
                   Lispnik: "Buddha is big, has hairy armpits, and laughs."
.

Eduardo Mu=F1oz <emufer@...> writes:

> A somewhat shalow google search doesnt give back anything
> obvious, but at the same time it is hard to believe that
> something like this has not been noticed previously.
> The following transcript is from a FreeBSD machine. Windows
> exhibits the same behaviour.

This is documented in the manual page: the order of arguments is
significant.  See the section "COMMAND LINE SYNTAX".

Cheers,

Christophe

* Juho Snellman <jsnell@...>
| <emufer@...> wrote: 
| > A somewhat shalow google search doesnt give back anything
| > obvious, but at the same time it is hard to believe that
| > something like this has not been noticed previously.
| 
| Please have a look at the "Command Line Options" chapter in the SBCL
| manual. --core is a runtime option, and must thus come before all
| toplevel options (like --userinit).

Ah, thanks for pointing me in the right direction. The
separation betwen runtime and toplevel options does not seem
intuitive at first but is suppose there is a rationale
behind it (so the runtime doesnt have to parse --eval
options for example).

Regards,

-- 
Eduardo Muñoz          | (prog () 10 (print "Hello world!")
http://www.boundp.net/ |          20 (go 10))