Greetings! "Steven H. Rogers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm starting to experiment with GCL again. 2.6.7 ANSI still has some > missing pieces and my understanding is that 2.7.0 is intended to be > fully ANSI compliant. Is 2.7.0 stable enough for me work with, or > should I stick with 2.6.x? > This is a good question. There are at least two more changes to the compiler I'm trying to find time to get in -- remaining compiler macros for builtins, and certain setq type propagation facilities. That said, there are several people in UT and elsewhere using 2.7.0 for their work right now. If you have a specific task in mind and want to check that it works, perhaps we could make another testing tag in CVS for your use and the use of others while the remaining work is getting done. Take care, > Regards, > Steve > > -- > Steven H. Rogers, PhD. > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Weblog: http://shrogers.com/weblog > "A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming is > not worth knowing." - Alan Perlis > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gcl-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcl-devel > > > -- Camm Maguire [EMAIL PROTECTED] ========================================================================== "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Baha'u'llah _______________________________________________ Gcl-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcl-devel
