Re: [Matlisp-users] Configuration failure on Linux/SBCL

[Raymond T. <to...@rt...>]

>>>>> "Robbie" == Robbie Sedgewick <rd...@me...> writes:

    Robbie> Yeah, I agree with what you are saying.  As much as I don't like
    Robbie> configure, there is really no other portable way to get that
    Robbie> information.  So we are stuck with configure, but is there any reason
    Robbie> not to use your defsystem code to do the compiling of the fortran in
    Robbie> matlisp by default?  And remove the makefile from the picture?

Look at blas.system and lapack.system.  These will compile up the
Fortran code.

However, it's not really very well integrated at this point.  Lisp
doesn't really know how to call the Fortran compiler with the right
arguments to compile the code to make a shared library.  Configure
would need to pass that info on somehow.

This could be added, I suppose, but I don't really see much point
anymore.  By the time you've done the work, you're 99 44/100% of the
way there for making make do it, so let make do it. :-)

Patches would probably be accepted, however.  :-)

And since the Fortran code almost never changes, I compile it up once
and forget it.  Then I just use xemacs + slime + mk:defsystem to
compile up the Lisp code, which changes a lot more often.

Ray