[ltk-user] Is this alive?
The web archives for 2013 don't seem to be working; is this list alive? Is LTK being developed? After finding 2 different TCL quoting bugs, I rewrote the quoting layer in my local copy. Is there any interest in incorporating that into the official version? -Jason
Hi Jason, the mailing list was dead as the mailing lists on common-lisp.net seemed to be down for a while, but your post shows that someone has fixed this. This is great news! So the list is live again. I am using LTk in production use and fixing all bugs I am getting aware of. Function-wise, Tk is covered to my knowledge, so development got a bit slow. But indeed, I would be very happy if you can report bugs and provide fixes. Best regards, Peter On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 8:54 PM, Jason Miller <jason@milr.com> wrote:
The web archives for 2013 don't seem to be working; is this list alive? Is LTK being developed? After finding 2 different TCL quoting bugs, I rewrote the quoting layer in my local copy. Is there any interest in incorporating that into the official version?
-Jason
Hi Peter, That's good to hear. Looking at a quick diff of my local version and 0.98, I have 3 bugfixes and a new feature. Bug fixes: 1) Completely changed how strings are escaped; many places did it improperly (For an example, try making a TEXT widget and filling it with things like newlines and ] and }). 2) Didn't build on recent sbcl due to exit/quit weirdness 3) The widget naming scheme eventually stomps on existing tk commands if you create enough widgets (e.g. wm). New Feature: Accessor for "state" on ttk widgets; note this implementation depends on spit-sequence; I can rewrite to not use that if you prefer. Do you want these in 4 separate patches? Should I just send the patches to the mailing list? Is there a version control repository with something newer than 0.98 for me to base my patches off of? -Jason I have 2 bugfixes and On 21:05 Fri 11 Oct , Peter Herth wrote:
Hi Jason, the mailing list was dead as the mailing lists on [1]common-lisp.net seemed to be down for a while, but your post shows that someone has fixed this. This is great news! So the list is live again. I am using LTk in production use and fixing all bugs I am getting aware of. Function-wise, Tk is covered to my knowledge, so development got a bit slow. But indeed, I would be very happy if you can report bugs and provide fixes. Best regards, Peter
References
1. http://common-lisp.net/ 2. mailto:jason@milr.com
Hi Jason, please send the patches also to the list, so all contributors can see them. The svn repository for ltk you can find at: http://ltk.rplay.net/svn/trunk/ltk/ Best regards, Peter On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 12:21 AM, Jason Miller <jason@milr.com> wrote:
Hi Peter,
That's good to hear.
Looking at a quick diff of my local version and 0.98, I have 3 bugfixes and a new feature.
Bug fixes:
1) Completely changed how strings are escaped; many places did it improperly (For an example, try making a TEXT widget and filling it with things like newlines and ] and }).
2) Didn't build on recent sbcl due to exit/quit weirdness
3) The widget naming scheme eventually stomps on existing tk commands if you create enough widgets (e.g. wm).
New Feature:
Accessor for "state" on ttk widgets; note this implementation depends on spit-sequence; I can rewrite to not use that if you prefer.
Do you want these in 4 separate patches? Should I just send the patches to the mailing list? Is there a version control repository with something newer than 0.98 for me to base my patches off of?
-Jason
I have 2 bugfixes and On 21:05 Fri 11 Oct , Peter Herth wrote:
Hi Jason, the mailing list was dead as the mailing lists on [1]common-lisp.net seemed to be down for a while, but your post shows that someone has fixed this. This is great news! So the list is live again. I am using LTk in production use and fixing all bugs I am getting aware of. Function-wise, Tk is covered to my knowledge, so development got a bit slow. But indeed, I would be very happy if you can report bugs and provide fixes. Best regards, Peter
References
1. http://common-lisp.net/ 2. mailto:jason@milr.com
On So, Okt 13, 2013 at 10:14:05 +0200, Peter Herth wrote:
please send the patches also to the list, so all contributors can see them.
Any chances that Jason's patches would find their way into the sources?
The svn repository for ltk you can find at: http://ltk.rplay.net/svn/trunk/ltk/
Is this the upstream for quicklisp? -- Josef Wolf jw@raven.inka.de
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 7:27 AM, Josef Wolf <jw@raven.inka.de> wrote:
Is this the upstream for quicklisp?
No, quicklisp is using the 0.98 tarball at [1]. Might be worth talking to Zach Beane about using the svn repository, if it's considered stable. For reference, quicklisp sources are listed in the quicklisp-projects project[2] on github. -Matt Stickney [1] http://www.peter-herth.de/ltk/ltk-0.98.tgz [2] https://github.com/quicklisp/quicklisp-projects/
participants (4)
-
Jason Miller -
Josef Wolf -
Matthew Stickney -
Peter Herth