From: Bruno H. <ha...@il...> - 2001-02-01 13:30:48
|
Raymond Wiker writes: > Hi. I'm wondering whether it would make sense to place CLX > under CLOCC. CLX is a an implementation of Xlib for Common Lisp, i.e, > a low-level library for working with the X Window System. It depends on the amount of changes you intend to make. Do you plan to move CLX from X11R4 to X11R5 and X11R6 level? If so (that's quite a lot of work), it'd very good if it was in CLOCC and shared among implementations. Other than that, I (as the maintainer of CLX for CLISP) don't see the point of some of your proposed modifications: > - CLX generally needs some work to be made more portable, and > to become a better fit to the ANSI standard for Common Lisp > (e.g, replace CLX's proprietary defsystem with a defsystem > defintion that uses mk:defsystem ANSI CL and mk:defsystem has nothing to do with each other. I'm happy with the clx/defsystem because it is extremely lightweight. > replace a number of > "defconstant"s with either "defparameter" or a combination > of "defconstant"/"load-time-value".) What's the point? These "defconstants" are perfectly valid. And defconstant allows the compiler to do optimizations which either "defparameter" or "defconstant"/"load-time-value" don't allow. Bruno |