Search
Sunday, 10th of January 2021, 20:26:30 UTC
20:26:52
puchacz
yes, I read it today for the first time. I am impressed :) and is it true that if I can make ECL run my application, there exists the right sequence of binary files that be produced to make my application binary?
20:26:53
shka_
puchacz: i also think that load may also work
20:27:31
shka_
if paths are resolved correctly
20:27:56
jackdaniel
I dont understand the question
20:28:18
shka_
jackdaniel: puchacz has a system that calls LOAD at the runtime
20:28:35
shka_
IIRC in such case ECL will simply use bytecode compiler
20:28:48
puchacz
yes, but I can make it call all loads on startup, this is what I do for sbcl save-and-die
20:28:54
jackdaniel
that's not a problem, load does not compile
20:29:51
jackdaniel
but as shka_ said, compiler is available at all times
20:30:23
puchacz
sure, then it should work, whatever hacks I discover in the code
20:30:28
jackdaniel
if gcc is absent, call (ext:install-bytecodes-compiler)
20:30:50
jackdaniel
should be a restart I suppose
20:30:51
shka_
yeah, performance can be hard to predict in such case though
20:31:14
shka_
but it may not even matter
20:31:29
shka_
anyway, have a good evening
20:55:23
ralt
I never tried to make a static binary with ECL
20:56:01
puchacz
I saw examples - you can even create a binary for arm/android
22:59:03
stargazesparkle
** NICK stargazesparkle[
22:59:20
stargazesparkle[
** NICK stargazesparkleM
23:41:49
stargazesparkle
I've been reading the lisp book someone sent me a few days ago and just wow
23:42:17
stargazesparkle
It's amazing how I managed to get myself as far as I did without considering what it was I was doing or why I was doing it
0:19:57
stargazesparkle
Practical Common Lisp
0:27:40
White_Flame
yep, PCL is quite highly regarded
0:28:45
charles`
I'm quite embarrassed to say that I have yet to read any lisp book.
0:32:55
White_Flame
charles`: different strokes for different folks
0:33:48
White_Flame
no shame in htat
1:06:44
charles`
Is there a way to ignore a package's nicknames in the local package without entering the debugger?
4:02:47
beach
Good morning everyone!
7:15:12
flip214
charles`: do you want in-package?
7:15:21
minion
Sorry, I couldn't find anything in the database for ``in-package''.
7:15:34
flip214
http://clhs.lisp.se/Body/m_in_pkg.htm
7:16:21
flip214
you first define a package that :USEs some other packages, then go IN-PACKAGE and have the :USEd package symbols available without package prefix.
7:40:19
beach
flip214: 1. It is specbot, not minion who knows about the Common Lisp HyperSpec.
7:40:23
specbot
http://www.lispworks.com/reference/HyperSpec/Body/m_in_pkg.htm
7:41:13
beach
flip214: 2. Perhaps you should warn about the risk of :USE-ing packages other than the CL package.
7:48:01
ck_
this particular use case read to me like using a package purely as a debugging environment, shortening the names you see.
7:48:44
beach
Oh, I didn't check the use case very well. Sorry.
7:54:25
flip214
beach: you're right, 2 is important. And I don't think this is _for_ debugging, only that doing it wrong _causes_ debugging ;/
7:55:10
ck_
It's actually me who misread it -- in my mind it said "when entering the debugger" instead of "without entering the debugger"
7:55:44
beach
ck_: Maybe you are turning dyslexic, just like I am?
8:00:28
ck_
beach: maybe. There are worse fates.
8:03:24
beach
ck_: Yes, I agree. It is possible to compensate a lot with spell checkers and abbrev processors.
8:04:33
beach
But things take longer. I get warnings about undefined functions and variables, but I can't tell that I misspelled the names.
8:05:33
flip214
one of my favourite spelling tricks (reviewing books) is to get a count of used words.... everything written only once is suspect, and twice needs a clear look as well
8:06:47
ck_
yes, that's a nice move. Also good for a histogram of non-alphanumeric characters, telling you whether some things are unbalanced
8:06:53
flip214
you think so? Thanks. I thought that's common.
8:07:39
flip214
but as I'm reviewing books and papers more or less regularly I might have automated a few bits more than other people, yeah.
Monday, 11th of January 2021, 8:26:30 UTC