March 2007 - drakma-devel@common-lisp.net

[drakma-devel] Re: Portability of Drakma
by Edi Weitz 07 Apr '07

07 Apr '07

On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 14:38:02 +0100, "Erik Huelsmann" <ehuels(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> - The code should have been tested successfully on at least the >> Lisp/OS combinations that are currently supported by Drakma. > > Is there a list somewhere as a reference to what I'm getting into? No, unfortunately not. I myself use mostly LispWorks (Windows and Linux/x86) and SBCL (Linux/x86). (LispWorks shouldn't be a problem anyway as it's not affected by the switch.) I think that at least LispWorks, SBCL, AllegroCL, CMUCL, CLISP, and OpenMCL should be supported, everything else being a bonus. Operating systems: Windows (where applicable), Linux, OS X. If you don't want to test all of this for yourself, how about offering a tarball of Drakma which uses usocket for download? Send an announcement to this mailing list including an overview of what you've tested and what not. We can ask "interested parties" to try it out and we'll switch to the new version in four weeks, say, unless someone objects. Does that sound OK? Cheers, Edi.

3 20

[drakma-devel] Re: New release 0.6.1 (was: [Bug Report] split-string behaves different in Lispworks and SBCL.) (Jianshi Huang)
by Jianshi Huang 09 Mar '07

09 Mar '07

> OK, with the help of comp.lang.lisp[1] I've convinced myself that > SPLIT-STRING relied on unspecified (or too vaguely specified) > behaviour. I've now released a new version which hopefully only uses > documented LOOP features. Please test. > So it's unspecified. BTW I enjoyed reading the discussion.

1 0

[drakma-devel] [Bug Report] split-string behaves different in Lispworks and SBCL.
by Jianshi Huang 09 Mar '07

09 Mar '07

I updated drakma to 0.6.0 but found the cookie could not be parsed correctly in SBCL. So I traced down into the source code and found it's the problem of function split-string. But in Lispworks Personal, it works well. As the function split-string is a big extended loop macro. So I think it might be a bug in SBCL's loop facility. I also tested in Allegro CL and found it behaves the same as SBCL. So which is correct? Here's the function split-string in 0.6.0 (10defun split-string (11string &optional (separators " ,-")) "Splits STRING into substrings separated by the characters in the sequence SEPARATORS. Empty substrings aren't collected." (12loop for 13char across 14string 15when (16find 17char separators :test #'18char=) 19when collector collect (20coerce collector '21string) into result 22and 23do (24setq collector 25nil) end else collect 26char into collector finally (27return (28if collector (29append result (30list (31coerce collector '32string))) result)))) Here's the REPL history in Lispworks: CL-USER 2 > (33setf x "Tue, 06-Mar-2007 00:00:00 GMT") "Tue, 06-Mar-2007 00:00:00 GMT" CL-USER 4 > (split-string x) ("Tue" "06" "Mar" "2007" "00:00:00" "GMT") Here's in SBCL: CL-USER> (34setf x "Tue, 06-Mar-2007 00:00:00 GMT") "Tue, 06-Mar-2007 00:00:00 GMT" CL-USER> (split-string x) ("Tue" "Tue06" "Tue06Mar" "Tue06Mar2007" "Tue06Mar200700:00:00" "Tue06Mar200700:00:00GMT")

3 4

[drakma-devel] Re: [Bug Report] split-string behaves different in Lispworks and SBCL. (Jianshi Huang)
by Jianshi Huang 08 Mar '07

08 Mar '07

> Would you like to ask on the SBCL mailing list? > Yes, I asked this question on #lisp and Andreas Fuchs has helped me posting it on SBCL. One of the reply said it should be a bug in SBCL because he gave an example showing the inconsistent behavior. Here's the example: Andreas Fuchs posted: (loop for i in '(1 2 3 a 4 5 6) if (not (symbolp i)) collect i into collector else do (setf collector nil) finally (return collector)) does not return (4 5 6), but (1 2 3 4 5 6). And Alastair Bridgewater said: Note using (1 2 3 a 4 5 6 b) as input will result in NIL. > > Here's the function split-string in 0.6.0 > > > > (10defun split-string (11string &optional (separators " ,-")) > > "Splits STRING into substrings separated by the characters in the > > sequence SEPARATORS. Empty substrings aren't collected." > > (12loop for 13char across 14string > > How did you manage to add those numbers there? Hmm.... these are all the magic numbers added by copying from paste.lisp.org. Here's the right one. (defun split-string (string &optional (separators " ,-")) "Splits STRING into substrings separated by the characters in the sequence SEPARATORS. Empty substrings aren't collected." (loop for char across string when (find char separators :test #'char=) when collector collect (coerce collector 'string) into result and do (setq collector nil) end else collect char into collector finally (return (if collector (append result (list (coerce collector 'string))) result)))) Cheers, pebblestone

1 0