From: Andreas F. <as...@vo...> - 2003-06-10 18:19:26
|
Hi, just couldn't resist. Here are links to patches, each of which: * adds the missing defgeneric clauses sb-bsd-sockets http://asf.void.at/patches/sb-bsd-sockets+defgenerics.diff * does the above, but also rids sb-bsd-sockets of the foreign-glue.lisp stuff: http://asf.void.at/patches/sb-bsd-sockets+defgenerics+grovelize.diff * adds bit-field support and a test suite of 17 tests (mostly for the bit-field stuff) to sb-grovel: http://asf.void.at/patches/sb-grovel+bitfields.diff Each patch is against the latest version of sb-grovel and sb-bsd-sockets respectively. I have tried to make each of them not dependent on any others. I hope that everything works out with those and apologize for the web links, but this mailing list accepts a maximum post of 36 kByte, else it requires moderator approval. Happy hacking, -- Andreas Fuchs, <as...@ac...>, as...@ja..., antifuchs |
From: William H. N. <wil...@ai...> - 2003-06-10 19:29:13
|
On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 06:11:16PM +0000, Andreas Fuchs wrote: > Each patch is against the latest version of sb-grovel and sb-bsd-sockets > respectively. I have tried to make each of them not dependent on any > others. I hope that everything works out with those and apologize for > the web links, but this mailing list accepts a maximum post of 36 kByte, > else it requires moderator approval. I routinely approve almost everything which initially gets bounced by this limit. I guess I might not want to dump patches bigger than 200 kbytes (ports to new architectures, perhaps?) into everyone's mailboxes; but in these days when people merrily mail photo galleries to each other, a 36 kbyte cutoff seems very low, and I would set it higher if I knew how to do it. (But links are fine too, as long as they're not too much trouble on your end.) -- William Harold Newman <wil...@ai...> C'mon. I just thought of that off the top of my head and no XP genius can figure this out? Please. -- <http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=2662&page=2> PGP key fingerprint 85 CE 1C BA 79 8D 51 8C B9 25 FB EE E0 C3 E5 7C |
From: Raymond T. <to...@rt...> - 2003-06-10 20:42:07
|
>>>>> "William" == William Harold Newman <wil...@ai...> writes: William> to each other, a 36 kbyte cutoff seems very low, and I would set it William> higher if I knew how to do it. It's buried somewhere in the admin page for the mailing list. I've done it before, but can't find it now because I've conveniently forgotten my admin password. Ray |
From: Christophe R. <cs...@ca...> - 2003-06-13 16:28:59
|
Andreas Fuchs <as...@vo...> writes: > just couldn't resist. Here are links to patches, each of which: > > * adds the missing defgeneric clauses sb-bsd-sockets > http://asf.void.at/patches/sb-bsd-sockets+defgenerics.diff Merged in sbcl-0.8.0.68, thanks. > * does the above, but also rids sb-bsd-sockets of the foreign-glue.lisp > stuff: > http://asf.void.at/patches/sb-bsd-sockets+defgenerics+grovelize.diff I haven't merged this one, mostly because its suitability depends on how Dan sees the evolution of db-sockets -- using sbcl's sb-grovel facility pretty much ensures that db-sockets effectively becomes an sbcl-only socket implementation (at least until other implementations catch up in this regard :-). Otherwise, it seems a very reasonable patch. > * adds bit-field support and a test suite of 17 tests (mostly for the > bit-field stuff) to sb-grovel: > http://asf.void.at/patches/sb-grovel+bitfields.diff This one looks too complicated for my brain on a Friday afternoon. At least the tests look good :-) Cheers, Christophe -- http://www-jcsu.jesus.cam.ac.uk/~csr21/ +44 1223 510 299/+44 7729 383 757 (set-pprint-dispatch 'number (lambda (s o) (declare (special b)) (format s b))) (defvar b "~&Just another Lisp hacker~%") (pprint #36rJesusCollegeCambridge) |