- iterate-devel - mailman3.common-lisp.net

[iterate-devel] Problem with new iterate install
by Phil 18 Mar '06

18 Mar '06

I am attempting to get iterate (1.4 from common-lisp.net page) going and could use some help. I've followed the docs on common-lisp.net and d/l'd the package and loaded with asdf but when I attempt something simple like (iter (for i from 1 to 10) (collect i)) to verify the installation, errors are received (undefined variable i) which I'm interpreting as the iterate install has something wrong. I'm having these problems both on Lispworks and OpenMCL. Any pointers are appreciated...

1 0

[iterate-devel] Count is a CL function
by Daniel Hasumi-Dickison 14 Mar '06

14 Mar '06

Hi -- I'm a happy user of iterate. I couldn't find a page to subscribe to or check the archive for this list so I hope I'm not reporting redundantly... I just found that iterate (v 1.2-ansi) makes the symbol count a synonym for counting. Since count is a Common Lisp function, it shouldn't be overloaded. Daniel

1 0

[iterate-devel] moving towards 1.5
by Hoehle, Joerg-Cyril 22 Feb '06

22 Feb '06

Hi, I'm (very) slowly preparing iterate 1.5. Changes will be: o version number o iterate.lisp will contain parts from ChangeLog file in header o Attila Lendvai's first-*-p Adding new exports to the ITERATE package is reason enough to bump the version number! More exports can cause more conflicts with software using the package. o my unification of clause specifiers for display-iterate-clauses, remove-clause and defmacro-clause (lost last year in HD crash, I still need to rewrite that simple code). Other suggestions welcome. I'd like to see + nice snippets or explanation in the manual Regards, Jörg Höhle.

1 0

[iterate-devel] iterate-latest.tar.gz lacking subdirectory
by Peter Schuller 14 Feb '06

14 Feb '06

Just a quick bug report. The distribution tarball: http://common-lisp.net/project/iterate/releases/iterate-current.tar.gz does not extract into a subdirectory. Other than being annoying (:)), it also breaks ASDF-INSTALL. (Note: I am not subscribed; please CC me if responses are meant for me to read.) -- / Peter Schuller, InfiDyne Technologies HB PGP userID: 0xE9758B7D or 'Peter Schuller <peter.schuller(a)infidyne.com>' Key retrieval: Send an E-Mail to getpgpkey(a)scode.org E-Mail: peter.schuller(a)infidyne.com Web: http://www.scode.org

1 0

Re: [iterate-devel] Fwd: if-first-iteration, a little better vers ion as an arch patch
by Hoehle, Joerg-Cyril 08 Feb '06

08 Feb '06

Hi, >> The user API looks ok, however the way you change >add-binding removes safety checks: several uses must have the >same default initialization and type, etc. This could cause >future extensions to break. >I don't really see what you mean here (newbie warning repeated :) > >I modified add-binding to accept an optional keyword param, Add-binding was previously used only via make-binding-internal. Your patch bypasses all the checks that the make-* functions do, and the functionality they provide. Is that clearer? >Maybe a make-shared-binding is what's missing? Indeed something seems missing, e.g. "create only if not existing already, but I don't know the name of the possibly existing binding". >- attila >(alias 101 on irc &no 'its not lisp code :) I was introduced to IRC in the late eighties but never felt comfortable with it: Too many concurrent discussions, despite threading GUI clients, and lots of bots & kicking. I very much prefer usenet news. Regards, Jörg Höhle.

2 2

[iterate-devel] Auto-nag: iterate link verifier failed
by root＠common-lisp.net 30 Jan '06

30 Jan '06

You are being nagged on because your project's name showed up in the nightly Checkbot run. Checkbot checks for broken links etc. This probably means that you are either pointing to a broken link or that someone is pointing to a broken link on your site. Or something else, it check's a bunch of stuff. Update your webpages or you shall be nagged again next week. To find out what's wrong with your webpages, please consult: http://common-lisp.net/checkbot/checkbot-common-lisp.net.html Any questions? You got this email but your webpage doesn't seem to be listed on the checkbot webpage? You can reach the author of this cronjob at clo-devel(a)common-lisp.net Thanks!

2 1

Re: [iterate-devel] Fwd: if-first-iteration, a little better vers ion as an arch patch
by Hoehle, Joerg-Cyril 29 Jan '06

29 Jan '06

Hi, Attila Lendvai wrote: [sorry to get back that late at you] >i've implemented another version of first-iteration-p and first-time-p >as discussed. please find a patch attached with some tests, it's >relative to the 1.4 release. The user API looks ok, however the way you change add-binding removes safety checks: several uses must have the same default initialization and type, etc. This could cause future extensions to break. I think the make-xyz-binding API should be used, that's what they are for, and they also provide for the optional type declarations. I agree the many make-*-binding are confusing. It's also confusing me every time! You once wrote you had a bad feeling about (setf (cddr entry) ...). But it is the "API" for adding extra information to bindings: "The alist entry is returned. It can be used to store additional info ..." < (locally (declare (optimize safety ... > (locally (declare (optimize (safety 3)... While I can indeed remember a bad declaration (revealed by sbcl/cmucl) somewhere in the testsuite fixed on 2005-05-20, the above change is not necessary. SAFETY just means (SAFETY 3). It's been there since CLtL1. See CLHS about OPTIMIZE. Which Lisp caused you to change all these declarations? Did it generate an error? Please report a conformance error to the implementor. The error I fixed on 2005-05-20 was an incorrect (declare (safety) ...) instead of (declare (optimize safety ...)). Regards, Jörg Höhle.

2 1

Re: [iterate-devel] Project status
by Hoehle, Joerg-Cyril 25 Jan '06

25 Jan '06

Attila Lendvai wrote: >actually what i am missing is only >a publically accessible repository preferrably with two branches, a >dev and a release branch. Well, in my view, Iterate is a fairly mature package. It's also close to a dead-end (by which I mean sort of an evolutionary stabilization). Therefore, it's not surprising that there's not much activity. People don't invent useful new Iteration forms every other day. So in my eyes, a single branch is fine. A devel branch would mean that there are actually several people with developer status, who share the distributed repository to exchange code before it's proven stable and released. With Iterate, I think there's no need for this, yet. As long as you can be confident that things will eventually become merged somehow by the maintainer. ;) The latter is a difference with CL-SDL. It's on sourceforge, there have been bug-reports (e.g. duplicate CD-status) but I've seen no response at all in the mailing list. A devel branch might come in handy should I do major modifications to the internal structure, with a slight change of semantics (e.g. move lots of initialization from SETQ to the binding LET), which might affect some users. That would require a branch, so that some bug fixes can still be applied to the stable release. But don't hold your breath for this to happen anytime soon. This notwithstanding, several developers/maintainers, some actually with write access to common-lisp.net could help things speed up... Regards, Jörg Höhle.

1 0

Re: [iterate-devel] Project status
by Hoehle, Joerg-Cyril 25 Jan '06

25 Jan '06

Hi, Attila Lendvai wrote: >Seems like iterate is a little bit frozen, just like many other lisp >projects (newbie impression). Actually, it's not. At least in my eyes. I'd say there's a distributed maintenance problem. I've been maintaining the Iterate code and documentation for the last year, but I don't have write access to common-lisp.net. So far, Marco has kindly maintained the website, putting the .lisp online. I sent him updates once a while, but somehow, some updates got lost, or my archives where somehow unreadable or whatever happened, nobody knows. It's true that the webpages have not been modified for ages. They are out of date. It's true that I've too little time for the many things I'd like to do. >Background: I've accidentally sent a patch for yaclml that used >first-iteration-p. Oops, that's too early, but not a great problem in practice. In a couple of years, nobody will remember that. I'm serious :) I'm sorry time prevented me from sending you feedback for the last patch. I'll do so asap. BTW, you're welcome to dig further into the Iterate codebase. >So if there's anything I can help with feel free to delegate >some todo's... Updating the webpages comes into mind, and snippets of TeX documentation for the clauses you wish added (just write ASCII in the style of the iterate manual, I can TeXify the text). Regards, Jörg Höhle.

2 1

[iterate-devel] Project status
by Attila Lendvai 23 Jan '06

23 Jan '06

hi Seems like iterate is a little bit frozen, just like many other lisp projects (newbie impression). I can't volunteer to help with the code maintenance yet, I need some more time with lisp for that. But I can help mailing people for account requests, to convert the repository to darcs if agreed, etc... Background: I've accidentally sent a patch for yaclml that used first-iteration-p. So if there's anything I can help with feel free to delegate some todo's... - attila (alias 101 on irc &no 'its not lisp code :)

1 0