From: Luke Gorrie <luke@bl...> - 2004-06-28 20:55:59
I've been lobbying on IRC to get precise source-path information
recorded with the default optimization settings, rather than just
top-level-form numbers. I think that Christophe and WHN have blessed
Now I just need to talk somebody into implementing it :-) so I humbly
suggest that it'd be a good thing.
My main interest is to make the (v)iew-source command in SLIME's
debugger show precise source forms when used on regular code.
I recently dusted off the venerable "Great Computer
Language Shootout." Since CMUCL was already part of
the set of tests, I did a bit of minor edits to get
things running under SBCL.
Unfortunately, being a relative SBCL novice I'm sure
that I have overlooked many compiler flags (since I
had to remove several of the CMUCL-specific items) and
may be giving SBCL lower marks than it deserves.
I was hoping some SBCL guru could take a look at the
existing sources and suggest improvements (see
red X's show where my ineptitude has overcome SBCL's
generally good compatibility with CMUCL.
Specific questions I have include:
* Whether the SBCL "compile-file" form has an analog
to CMUCL's ":block-compile" flag (and even if it's of
* If there is an easy CMUCL Sockets -> SBCL sockets
* Why the 'unsigned-byte type seems to be such a
problem when used with the array class (see
-- this doesn't even compile under CMUCL's current
release, so I'm not sure how this came into being).
I'd appreciate any comments you might have.
Get latest updates about Open Source Projects, Conferences and News.