Dear Waldek, Peter,
Waldek Hebisch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I belive that the change to Makefile.in and changes to 'foam_l.lisp' can go
> in. [...]
I just wanted to commit the change to Makefile.in, and wanted to write a line
of explication. Then I found that Makefile.pamphlet exists, and looked up the
meaning of DEP, which explained a bit:
The {\bf DEP} variable contains the list of files that
will be loaded into {\bf DEPSYS}. Notice that these files
are loaded in interpreted form. We are not concerned about
the compile time performance so we can use interpreted code.
We do, however, care about the macros as these will be
expanded in later compiles. All macros are assumed to be
in this list of files.
<<environment>>=
DEP= vmlisp.lisp ggreater.lisp \
hash.lisp bootfuns.lisp \
union.lisp nlib.lisp \
macros.lisp comp.lisp \
spaderror.lisp debug.lisp \
spad.lisp bits.lisp \
setq.lisp property.lisp \
foam_l.lisp \
axext_l.lisp
I'm not quite sure whether I want to commit this if it's quite unnecessary. On
the other hand, I have no idea in which direction interp is heading. Comparing
with OpenAxiom, the makefiles are entirely different...
Peter: is it necessary to use depsys when building the aldor interface? (I
have no idea what depsys is for, I must admit)
Gaby: As far as I remember, depsys was removed from OpenAxiom. I have no idea
whether somebody managed to build the aldor interface with OpenAxiom -
could you please report?
Martin
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100.
Use priority code J8TL2D2.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
_______________________________________________
open-axiom-devel mailing list
open-axiom-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open-axiom-devel
