On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 22:37:48 -0800, Elliott Slaughter  
<[email protected]> wrote:

> I guess I have edit privileges for the wiki, but I don't want to go over
> anyone's head, and wasn't clear on the appropriate procedures for  
> changing
> things. Thus the rest of this email. (But if you'd rather I just change  
> the
> wiki, I can do that too.)

Go nuts.

> Directory Structure: I don't think we should specify the install location
> for the user. SBCL works with spaces in the path, and so do SDL and all  
> the
> other libraries needed for Lispbuilder. So if a user has their own idea  
> of
> what they want, they'll have it anyways. And if they don't, the default
> install location for SBCL should work fine.

For SBCL then that makes sense.

>
> LISPBUILDER-SDL & Binaries: This is a nitpick, but you could make source  
> and
> downloads links instead of bold.

OK.

>
> sbclrc: The directory section of this code doesn't need to be longer than
> one line:
>
> (pushnew "C:\\sbcl\\site\\*\\" asdf:*central-registry* :test 'equal)
>
> Which has the additional advantages that if the user wants to start
> installing more libraries, all they have to do is drop them into the  
> site\
> directory and restart lisp.

I didn't know that pathnames with wildcards were allowed in  
*central-registry*. Certainly makes things easier. Is this true for other  
Lisps as well, or only SBCL?

>
> Starting SBCL: This is painful to type, and shouldn't be necessary if  
> using
> the SBCL binary installer properly (since the installer should set  
> SBCL_HOME
> to "C:\\sbcl\\").
>

OK. That should be mentioned in the text, that the user must ensure that  
SBCL_HOME is set to the location of the SBCL directory.

> rlwrap: What exactly are we writing this guide for? If this is aimed  
> solely
> to get SBCL and Lispbuilder working, then this section is unnecessary. If
> this is aimed to give the user a decent development environment, then  
> rlwrap
> alone, while nice, falls quite short. (I infrequently use the SBCL  
> terminal
> prompt itself, but instead the SLIME REPL, so I personally would skip  
> this
> step either way.) You explicitly state that you don't go over Emacs
> installation, so I would lean toward just removing this entirely and  
> writing
> a seperate IDE (Emacs?) setup guide if that is desirable.

I just moved the structure that I found here  
http://mono.kmc.gr.jp/~mak/hiki/?lisp%2Flispbuilder%2Fwindows%2Fsbcl and  
added English text. I don't mind if you remove this section as I don't use  
rlwrap myself.

You may also want to mention that the current SBCL win32 binary release is  
broken with SLIME.

- Luke
_______________________________________________
application-builder mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/application-builder

Reply via email to