Re: Is it hard to support more chars in cmucl?
> "binghe" == binghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: binghe> Hello, binghe> I've found the binaries at binghe> ftp://ftp.common-lisp.net/pub/project/cmucl/experimental/cmucl-unicode-2002-10-05-x86-linux.tar.bz2 binghe> but I can't run it, just got a "Segment Fault" error... Hmm, I think it worked for me on my Suse system a few months ago. Let me try again. binghe> Is it's source still available? I think I need the source to have a binghe> reference on how to port sbcl's unicode support to CMUCL. (I really want binghe> to learn and try to do this, although I'm still a primer. I can't be binghe> tolerant of that ALL BUT CMUCL have supported unicode!) The source is in CVS. I'm not exactly sure where, but the tag UNICODE-BRANCH probably has the desired sources. Ray
Re: Is it hard to support more chars in cmucl?
Hello, I've found the binaries at ftp://ftp.common-lisp.net/pub/project/cmucl/experimental/cmucl-unicode-2002-10-05-x86-linux.tar.bz2 but I can't run it, just got a "Segment Fault" error... Is it's source still available? I think I need the source to have a reference on how to port sbcl's unicode support to CMUCL. (I really want to learn and try to do this, although I'm still a primer. I can't be tolerant of that ALL BUT CMUCL have supported unicode!) Raymond Toy wrote: >> "binghe" == binghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > > binghe> Hello everyone, > > [snip] > > binghe> So I want to know that 'is it hard to support more chars in > cmucl?' if > binghe> cmucl does, I think it'll be perfect! > > There was a unicode version of cmucl done several years ago, but > unfortunately it's rotted quite a bit. I have tried a little to bring > it up-to-date, but since I'm illiterate, unicode doesn't help me. > > I believe the binaries are still available. Look in the experimental > directory. > > Ray > > > -- (setq reply-to (concatenate 'string "Binghe " ""))
Re: Is it hard to support more chars in cmucl?
> "tf" == Thomas Fischbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: tf> Considering this situation, I'd really like to try digging a bit deeper tf> into CMUCL interna, especially concerning issues such as the code generator. tf> Where can I get the relevant information? Maybe from SBCL documents? the CMUCL Internals Manual is available (though incomplete) from http://common-lisp.net/project/cmucl/doc/CMUCL-design.pdf> and the source code itself, which is quite well commented. Also see the sbcl-internals wiki at http://sbcl-internals.cliki.net/>. -- Eric Marsden
Re: Is it hard to support more chars in cmucl?
On Sun, 21 Aug 2005, Eric Marsden wrote: > csr> (Just to raise the question: people wondering about porting SBCL's > csr> Unicode to CMUCL might be advised to perform the inverse calculation, > csr> of what CMUCL features are needed in SBCL to switch in that > csr> direction.) > > I second Christophe's remark here. Implementing Unicode in CMUCL > would require a considerable amount of work, and given the number of > currently active maintainers (really only Raymond who is doing a > fantastic job on this large task), is unlikely to happen soon or > ever. Considering this situation, I'd really like to try digging a bit deeper into CMUCL interna, especially concerning issues such as the code generator. Where can I get the relevant information? Maybe from SBCL documents? -- regards, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (o_ Thomas Fischbacher - http://www.cip.physik.uni-muenchen.de/~tf //\ (lambda (n) ((lambda (p q r) (p p q r)) (lambda (g x y) V_/_ (if (= x 0) y (g g (- x 1) (* x y n 1)) (Debian GNU)
Re: Is it hard to support more chars in cmucl?
> "csr" == Christophe Rhodes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: csr> (Just to raise the question: people wondering about porting SBCL's csr> Unicode to CMUCL might be advised to perform the inverse calculation, csr> of what CMUCL features are needed in SBCL to switch in that csr> direction.) I second Christophe's remark here. Implementing Unicode in CMUCL would require a considerable amount of work, and given the number of currently active maintainers (really only Raymond who is doing a fantastic job on this large task), is unlikely to happen soon or ever. My personal view of future CMUCL development is that it is mostly in maintenance mode, remaining a relatively stable code base for people who have made large investments in CMUCL extensions and features, or who are comfortable with the system in its current state. People who are looking for an implementation that will take them to exciting new places should probably look at SBCL, since it has a larger number of active developers, and a number of technical advantages over CMUCL's code base. Other CMUCL developers may disagree with this viewpoint, though. CMUCL features that I think would be useful/interesting to have in SBCL: the bytecode interpreter (for smaller images), the interpreter (for the ppcre-load/source benchmark :-). -- Eric Marsden
Re: Is it hard to support more chars in cmucl?
> "Harald" == Harald Hanche-Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Harald> + Raymond Toy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Harald> | There was a unicode version of cmucl done several years ago, but Harald> | unfortunately it's rotted quite a bit. I have tried a little to Harald> | bring it up-to-date, but since I'm illiterate, unicode doesn't help Harald> | me. Harald> Rather than reviving that, wouldn't it make more sense to port the Harald> (fairly recent) unicode support from sbcl? I believe that work was My poor, failed attempt predates sbcl's unicode support. Ray
Re: Is it hard to support more chars in cmucl?
Harald Hanche-Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > + Raymond Toy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > | There was a unicode version of cmucl done several years ago, but > | unfortunately it's rotted quite a bit. I have tried a little to > | bring it up-to-date, but since I'm illiterate, unicode doesn't help > | me. > > Rather than reviving that, wouldn't it make more sense to port the > (fairly recent) unicode support from sbcl? I believe that work was > done by Christophe Rhodes, who is also on this list. He may be able > to comment on the feasibility of such a port. Searching for the > string "sb-unicode" in the sbcl sources should give an idea where > changes will be necessary. I count 38 files in the sbcl distribution > containing this string, so it's probably not done in an afternoon. Er, hi. . It's not done in an afternoon, no, and ironically it would be mildly non-trivial because cmucl doesn't support (vector nil) as strings. I believe it took of the order of 40 distinct cvs revisions to take a non-Unicode sbcl to one which had support for #x11 characters and latin-1 and utf-8 external formats, and to that you'd need to add the time to implement more than one representation for strings. Additionally, more external formats have been added since that branch was merged, and development is ongoing. In traditional CMUCL time-units, I suspect it takes of the order of one Wizard-month (or two Christophe-months) to do such a port. Non-Wizards have to learn about bootstrapping cross-compiles reliably and gdb debugging, because it's highly probable that things will go wrong. (Portions of this development came from Eric Marsden, Teemu Kalvas and Robert J. Macomber, and probably others I've forgotten.) Cheers, Christophe (Just to raise the question: people wondering about porting SBCL's Unicode to CMUCL might be advised to perform the inverse calculation, of what CMUCL features are needed in SBCL to switch in that direction.)
Re: Is it hard to support more chars in cmucl?
+ Raymond Toy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: | There was a unicode version of cmucl done several years ago, but | unfortunately it's rotted quite a bit. I have tried a little to | bring it up-to-date, but since I'm illiterate, unicode doesn't help | me. Rather than reviving that, wouldn't it make more sense to port the (fairly recent) unicode support from sbcl? I believe that work was done by Christophe Rhodes, who is also on this list. He may be able to comment on the feasibility of such a port. Searching for the string "sb-unicode" in the sbcl sources should give an idea where changes will be necessary. I count 38 files in the sbcl distribution containing this string, so it's probably not done in an afternoon. - Harald
Re: Is it hard to support more chars in cmucl?
> "binghe" == binghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: binghe> Hello everyone, [snip] binghe> So I want to know that 'is it hard to support more chars in cmucl?' if binghe> cmucl does, I think it'll be perfect! There was a unicode version of cmucl done several years ago, but unfortunately it's rotted quite a bit. I have tried a little to bring it up-to-date, but since I'm illiterate, unicode doesn't help me. I believe the binaries are still available. Look in the experimental directory. Ray
