10 Apr
2006
10 Apr
'06
7:37 p.m.
Christophe Rhodes <csr21@cam.ac.uk> writes:
Be that as it may, rather than speculating further I would suggest to Paolo that he try with the mcclim sources of "a few weeks ago" in the same lisp and compares the results. If there is a difference, then
I have checked out a fresh copy of McCLIM's CVS sources with: cvs co -D 2006-03-25 mcclim The test: (time (clim-listener::com-show-class-subclasses t)) takes about 0.92 s on the same system, i.e. a 2.8 GHz Pentium IV machine running Slackware Linux 10.0 and CMUCL Snapshot 2006-02 (19C). Compilation with CMUCL remained broken for about a month before late March 2006. Paolo -- Lisp Propulsion Laboratory log - http://www.paoloamoroso.it/log