freenode/#lisp - IRC Chatlog
Search
2:47:11
pjb
emacs packages are some kind of (CL) system. There's nothing like CL packages in emacs lisp. (there are obarray which are some low-level stuff that could be used to implement CL packages in emacs lisp, if there was hooks in the reader available).
2:54:02
edgar-rft
My problem is more that I cannot find any documentation about a -*- Package: foo -*- file vaiable. Neither in the Emacs manuals nor in the Slime manual. I just simply have no idea where this variable comes from.
2:58:32
pjb
edgar-rft: slime checks for in-package forms to read and evaluate things in the right package. Without an in-package, I guess it will fall back to the package name bond to package.
3:00:25
edgar-rft
pjb: That's how Common Lisp handles packages, what has nothing to do at all with file local Emacs variables.
3:07:45
devon
pjb, edgar-rft: Emacs *should* downcase all file-local variables but stupidly does it only for those variables where someone complained.
3:09:23
devon
pjb, edgar-rft: Another wheel to re-invent, [rolls eyes] but it beats editing thousands of files starting with -*- base: 10; package: foo; readtable: CL -*-
6:43:40
flip214
when using the access library, can I tell it to do NTHCAR? (access:accesses ...) gives me a list, but with 0 as additional path specifier I only get NIL.
8:02:50
shka__
is coercing adjustable array of characters to simple-string guaranteed to work on a standard CL implementation?
8:48:18
beach
asdf_asdf_asdf: I am reading your questions in the channel logs, and I don't quite understand why you program in Common Lisp, given that you seem to want to treat it as just another language in the C family, where you can take the address of variables, and manipulate pointers explicitly.
8:48:18
beach
I think you would be much better off using a language in that family, rather than trying to twist Common Lisp into something it really is not in the first place.
8:49:53
beach
Perhaps you are under the impression that Common Lisp is just another language in the same family, only with a different syntax. That is not the case. It is fundamentally different with automatic memory management and uniform reference semantics.
8:52:11
beach
Well, I am afraid that asdf_asdf_asdf is wasting time because of a fundamental misunderstanding about what Common Lisp is.
8:52:45
beach
And I don't understand this desire of simultaneously using Common Lisp and treating is at something it is not.
8:55:59
asdf_asdf_asdf
Some lack me theory, so that not understand that probably reference not exists in CL.
8:57:46
beach
asdf_asdf_asdf: I understand you might not quite understand the semantics, but why are you using Common Lisp in the first place if you want to program as if you are using C, and, as I recall, also accessing C code from Common Lisp?
8:58:40
beach
asdf_asdf_asdf: If you are using Common Lisp in order to learn how to program in it, I strongly recommend you not try to interface to C in the beginning.
9:00:04
beach
asdf_asdf_asdf: If you use Common Lisp that way, the code you are going to end up with (if you succeed at all) is going to be very ugly.