free blog   apache   shopping directory   php powered
Fare"Your kitten of death awaits": is it a reference to this?
houselFare: I always assumed it referred to
nyefHello all.
Farenyef, we were discussing kittens of death.
nyefOh, goody.
Farehousel, is bunbun a kitten?
Farelooks like a rabbit
houselbunbun is the rabbit
FareI see no kitten of death there
jsnellread a few strips forwards
houselYou have to read through several comics (it's a fairly long story arc)
housel(It's a horror movie parody; the gist is that "The Evil" is a litter of kittens spawned by satan, which will reduce to a mist of blood and gore anyone who fails to keep them fed)
houselnyef: so is that where it came from, or is "your kitten of death awaits" an independent invention?
nyeflose("CATS.  CATS ARE NICE.\n");
Farelife justifies fiction after the fact.
nyefIf anything, deathkitten was inspired by Pratchett, except that I don't actually -like- the discworld books.
nyefSo, I noticed something last weekend: SBCL is clearly not standard-compliant with respect to PATHNAME-HOST. (pathname-host #p"") doesn't return a valid pathname host.
fe[nl]ixnyef: nobody seems to have noticed it before :)
prdoes anybody know of some library which would allow me to read, write and convert-to fixed-size binary types, like if i'd want to deal with 12 bit vectors/"types"
Xachpr: binary-types, maybe?
nyefSo, what I'm thinking for the UNC filespec thing is to define the share as the device and the server as the host, representing the host as a list of the hostname-as-a-string, to distinguish it from a valid logical pathname host (which must be a string), and from the local machine (which can be distinguished as a zero-length list of strings).
nyefSince only logical pathname hosts have a defined syntax for parsing pathnames, we can then use //server/share/ to parse to :host ("server") :device "share".
Fadeccl returns :UNSPECIFIC for that pathname-host form.
nyefThat's possibly a valid interpretation.
nyefI'm not sure how it all works out yet, but this is the direction I'm leaning towards.
drewc heh, i was reading "Macros that Reach Out and Touch Somewhere" and thinking to myself "hrmm... this is almost like monads".. then i threw the idea way because _everything_ has looked like monads to me lately.
pkhuongdrewc: sounds right.
xx7sinsxDoes anyone know the command for droping to shell mode in emacs GNU 23?
drewcsure enough, the conclusion mentions that it's like monads
nyefSo, the other thing that's bugging me right now is that SBCL doesn't build the assembler-routines before first genesis, which neatly complicates my plan for destroying x86oid-assem.S.
wglxx7sinsx: M-x shell
xx7sinsxwgl: Thank you
p_lnyef: regarding UNC spec, could we get logical-pathnames -> UNC with local C: as "\\.\C:"?
nyefNot sure.
p_lI mean, CL kinda isn't limited to using DOS-compatible pathnames and logical pathnames serve as IMHO nice way to slip NT pathnames in
HET2what are logical pathnames
nyefclhs 19.3
nyefHET2: That's the section of the CLHS on the subject.
p_lHET2: I can't decide if logical pathnames are awesome gift of god or rotten stuff to leave alone ;-)
Action: nyef leans more towards awsome gift, but is aware of some of the rotten stuff that got mixed in.
HET2oh my god, lispworks lisp is so insanely expensive
fe[nl]ixdepends on your budget
Action: drewc thinks lispworks is a pretty good deal if you need what it offers
drewcand if you're just a hobbyist, they offer a free version... which is not expensive at all.
Action: nyef checks his budget... Funny, it's all allocated towards books, food, and the occasional bit of hardware, with the minor possibility of buying a 64-bit windows license.
Action: drewc has budgeted for a new guitar
drewcthe one i want makes lispworks look cheap
drewcthe one i'm going to get, otoh
fe[nl]ixScieneer ?
drewcis about the same price range.
Action: p_l for some reason ended with having a 2k8r2 server license for free. It's his only personally-owned non-oem windows license o_O
drewcgenera still 5k?
antoszkap_l: A non-edu one? Someone just gave it to you?
p_lantoszka: edu one, except instead of MSDNAA I got it straight from MS
antoszkalucky b'tard :)
p_lwell, a slightly modified edu - basically, it's "don't use it for commercial purposes" and the rest is normal :D
p_lantoszka: you might be eligible as well ;D
nyefOh, I might be getting a PPC G5 next weekend.
Ralithp_l: "don't use it for commercial purposes?"  So basically, don't own it while you have a job?
p_lRalith: no, don't use it to run business/develop commercial software
nyefWhat about using it to develop open source software?
stassatsand selling it?
nyef(What about using it to develop open source software -for money-?)
Ralithwhat about using it to develop open source software *someone else* sells?
pastorni'm looking for the eval/apply picture with the two hands holding each other
p_lnyef: well, in theory, you can develop open source on it, as long as it isn't directly used for commercial purpose
pastorngoogle images gives me no luck
p_lRalith: so selling by third party is possible
nyefWhat about a third party selling the software and giving you a "kickback"?
p_lnyef: murky area
Ralithp_l: even if the third party is the actual project, and you're submitting patches?
p_lI suspect it depends on local laws
p_lanyway, it fills my purposes nicely
pastorndoes anyone know what picture i'm talking about?
prounis PAIP a book worth having on your desk as a reference?
stassatsit's not a reference book
drewcit _is_ worth having mind you.
p_lproun: not as reference. As an actual textbook to learn various useful things (not only for Lisp), yes
antoszkaMine's on the way.
prounjust in your personal perference, would you get it in dead tree form?
Action: p_l keeps university's only "on shelf" copy for himself
drewci got my copy at the MIT coop :)
Ralithstassats: the introduction suggests it be used as such.
p_lI'm kinda disappointed that no-one tried to recall mine. I suspect I'm one of the few lispers around -_-
p_l(on the uni, I mean)
prounso all and all, worth owning? by that i mean i can go back to it again and again?
p_lproun: I'd say so
nyef... Is there a maximum length for defined constants in C?
Ralithnyef: for their names?
RalithZhivago would probably know
nyefI think the longest I have here is about 35 characters.
nyefAnd, while I'm clearly going to have trouble with the ones that try to have an *, a <, or a > in their names, I'd like to know I'm not going to run into trouble about simple length.
rebnyef: There used to be absurdly short limits, such as externals needed be unique in the first 7? characters.  Any modern compiler should be able to handle very long macro names.
nowhere_manwhy would #\* be a problem in a name?
nowhere_mannyef: sorry, I read CL, not C
nyefnowhere_man: Yeah, I'm generating C #defines from a lisp program.
Ralithreb: macros are handled by the preprocessor.
Ralithshouldn't get to the compiler at all.
nyefI'm also finding that there are two separate extern definitions for call_into_lisp, in separate .c files.
rebRalith: I was interpreting "defined constants" to mean preprocessor macro constants.
Ralithreb: the concept of "external" doesn't apply to preprocessor symbols.
Ralithnor does the modernnes of the compiler have much bearing.
rebBy the way, there's no demand for a separate preprocessor.  It can be and often is built in to the compiler.
Ralithnyef: for those very reasons I don't actually think that *<>etc are likely to be an issue.
rebRalith: I am aware of that.  I was using it merely as an example of outdated limits that no compiler observes today, save perhaps embedded ones.
nyefRalith: My reason for *, < and > not being an issue is simpler: I don't actually need to refer to them from C code, they just got caught in the conversion process.
Adlaiwhat's the point of writing compiler macros for macros?
Ralithreb: 'kay
nyefAdlai: Compiler macros for normal macros? Very little, I'd imagine.
adehtnyef: C++98 suggests a minimum limit of 1024 for "initial characters" in an identifier
Ralithadeht: damn O.o
RalithI guess that's a case of "Find the largest sane limit, and raise it an order of magnitude."
p_lnyef: Will go outside 255 bytes + null?
Adlainyef, I wonder why it's allowed by the spec.
nyefp_l: I'd be surprised if the identifiers break 50 characters, and completely shocked if they break 80.
adehtnyef: same with C++03.. C99 imposes a minimum of 63 characters limit for internal identifiers and 31 for external identifiers (but watch out for "universal character names")
Action: nyef tries to remember how to do a cast to a function pointer without involving a typedef.
Ralithnyef: just involve typedef.
Ralithfor sanity's sake.
Raliththink of the readers.
Action: nyef just didn't want to burn the extra identifier, but an _t suffix is unlikely to collide.
nyef#define call_into_lisp ((call_into_lisp_t)ASMRTN_CALL_INTO_LISP), here we come!
Ralithnyef: what are you doing in C, anyway?
nyefMoving some assembly around, actually.
nyefUh-oh... How on earth am I supposed to convert GNAME(current_thread)@TPOFF(%rax) to something I can use?
GuthurI was using function pointers there recently, what an awful form
p_lnyef: is the platform constrained in any way or does it have to be very portable?
nyefI'm not sure at this point.
nyefI'm targetting gcc at this point, with the exepctation that someone will want to re-target to MSVC.
p_lon ELF platforms, most compilers will give you *very* long identifiers, at least in C, since they usually just output the symbol literally, and C++ kinda forces the linkers to support symbol names that are way longer than 100 characters
Adlaihm, why are symbol macros replacement templates, rather than expanders like normal macros?
rahulerm... what would be involved in "expanding" them?
Adlaisame thing that would be involved in expanding a macro, except that this expansion function would have zero arguments
rahul. . .
nyefAdlai: You're... looking to conditionalize the expansion of a symbol-macro on some piece of dynamic state?
Adlainyef, no, I'm wondering whether it's possible to generate the expansion of a symbol macro, rather than have to write it all out. This is just out of curiosity though.
rahulyes, it's possible
rahulhow would anything NOT be possible? this is lisp, man!
AdlaiI guess you could wrap the definition of the symbol macro with a macrolet that did the code generation.
Adlaior maybe expand to the macrolet? dunno. I'll cross this bridge _if_ I even reach it :)
rahulor expand to a macro
rahulor expand to a macro invocation, rather
Adlairight, I guess (define-symbol-macro foo (macrolet ((generate-expansion () ..)) (generate-expansion)))
nyefI usually wrap them the other way around, TBH.
nyefBut then, I usually use -local- symbol-macros.
Adlaiwhat do you mean, nyef ?
nyefI have a symbol-macro that expands into an accessor form, and have the accessor defined -around- the symbol-macrolet, but it doesn't actually matter which way it happens.
nyefAnother cute thing you can do is have a macro that expands to a define-symbol-macro.
rahulformulate has a macro that expands to define-symbol-macro
rahulfor implementing variables that are formulas
nyefOkay, time to see if this maniac idea passes its smoke test.
qrushhi there, trying to run something with sbcl, i've got it loaded up, and it has a defun run in it...
qrushhow the heck do i call that?
qrush(run) doesn't work
qrushi linked the .asd, ran   (asdf:oos 'asdf:load-op :myprog)
qrushand it definitely compiles
nyefI would suggest that the problem is most likely something to do with the package system. Have a look for a DEFPACKAGE form in the source and try (package-name:run).
nyefOh, -joy-. all_threads is hit from lisp -before- toplevel form processing.
nyefHow do I make this not suck?
qrushnyef: yeah, it's got a cl:defpackage in it
qrushexports #:run
qrushHow do i call that?
nyefWhat's the package name?
nyefFirst parameter to the defpackage.
qrush(cl:defpackage :mcpixel
nyefOkay, try (mcpixel:run).
qrushdebugger invoked on a SIMPLE-ERROR: No CLIM-SYS:MAKE-PROCESS here.
qrushi've got CLIM working with asdf
nyefAnd now you're beyond where I can really help you, I'm afraid.
qrushthis whole CLIM thing is really, really frustratingly complex.
qrushnyef: well, i'm just trying to run the program...i definitely have it compiled
nyef... Actually, one thing comes to mind. Are you running on a threaded SBCL or one without thread support?
qrushI have no idea, whatever macports installed.
nyef(Look for :sb-thread in *features*.)
qrushwhy does that even matter?
pkhuongqrush: can't make a new thread if your implementation doesn't support threads.
nyefBecause CLIM-SYS:MAKE-PROCESS is a function to create a new thread.
nyefpkhuong: Hey, any ideas on how to resolve an assembly-routine address in Lisp code prior to toplevel-form processing in cold-init?
qrushYeah, fuck this. way too complicated.
qrushThanks for the help, just not worth it though :)
pkhuongnyef: can't you do that while building th ecold core?
nyefMcCLIM loses again... and vendor packaging doesn't win either.
nyefFrom outside the compiler?
nyefI think I may need a parallel to foreign-symbol-dataref-sap or something.
pkhuongYeah, outside the compiler. When you build the cold core you know where the routines have wound up.
nyefSure, but how do I persuade the compiler to dump a fixup in the first place?
pkhuongnyef: it's probably a matter of "port install sbcl+thread", actually.
pkhuongoh. Right.
nyefI have hope that this may be the last hurdle before my initial proof-of-concept for this entire demented idea works.
Guthurnyef: what is your demented idea; if it can be summed up quickly
Popular searches: disconnecting ghost   qheaderview   regex   

Generated by 2.1mg by Jeff Waugh - return