Which Lisp for Windows if not GCL? WAS: foreign language patch for build-index+cl-ppcre branch
Subject: Which Lisp for Windows if not GCL? WAS: foreign language patch for build-index+cl-ppcre branch
From: Stavros Macrakis
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 15:11:29 -0500
As of June last year (see your message below), there were cases (stack
overflow?) where Clozure could not recover from errors, and terminated
instead. If I remember correctly, RJF and I considered that a fatal flaw
for an interactive system, but you were willing to live with it.
Has this problem been fixed? Or do you simply consider it less important
than other issues?
-s
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Robert Dodier <robert.dodier at gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 13:32
Subject: Re: [Maxima] Lisp stack overflow
To: Barton Willis <willisb at unk.edu>
Cc: maxima at math.utexas.edu, Alejandro Morales <mori at fis.unam.mx>
On 6/4/10, Barton Willis <willisb at unk.edu> wrote:
> This is a bug; here is a related example:
>
> (%i1) dpart(sin(a+b),1);
> Maxima encountered a Lisp error:
Seems to be a bug of recent origin; works OK in Maxima 5.20.0,
not in 5.21.0.
The problem might or might not be in dpart, I can't tell;
I can't get a useful stack trace out of GCL (no relevant info),
Clisp (crash), or Clozure CL (crash).
best
Robert Dodier
_______________________________________________
Maxima mailing list
Maxima at math.utexas.edu
http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 15:01, Robert Dodier <robert.dodier at gmail.com>wrote:
> Clozure CL runs on Windows, can compile & run Maxima on Windows
> (I've done that myself), is under active development, and reasonably fast.
> So I'll suggest CCL.
>
> best
>
> Robert Dodier
>
> On 2/25/11, Stavros Macrakis <macrakis at alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 01:53, Robert Dodier <robert.dodier at gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> I don't care what GCL does or doesn't, anymore.
> >>
> >
> > What Lisp do you propose for the Windows distribution? I thought that
> the
> > last time we discussed this, there was a fatal flaw with every other Lisp
> > for Windows. Am I remembering incorrectly, or has something changed?
> >
> > -s
> >
>