Camm Maguire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Greetings! This stuff sounds great, and likely can be included in the
> gcl distribution proper even though it is an ansi extension. I think
> slime depends on gray streams, right? That would be reason enough.
> But perhaps support should be in the for
Greetings! This stuff sounds great, and likely can be included in the
gcl distribution proper even though it is an ansi extension. I think
slime depends on gray streams, right? That would be reason enough.
But perhaps support should be in the form of an autoloadable module.
Take care,
Stephen
C Y <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Are they mutually exclusive?
In a sense, yes. Take a look at the Simple streams doc and see how
the traditional common lisp functions are redefined to support both
approaches. The starting point would probably be here:
http://www.franz.com/support/documentati
--- Stephen Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think they take different approaches, where both have advantages
> and disadvantages in certain applications. For example, I think
> Simple streams have a good interface for dealing with common byte-
> based operations like reading files, compress
C Y <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Not a particularly useful question, but I am curious - how serious is
> the collision conceptually between Gray Streams and Simple Streams? Is
> one a special case of the other, for example? (I.e. could Simple
> Streams be regarded as a special case layer on top
--- Stephen Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I will start on getting some preliminary work done. Any more
> questions/thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
Not a particularly useful question, but I am curious - how serious is
the collision conceptually between Gray Streams and Simple Stream
C Y <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> --- Stephen Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > A large drawback is that neither, to my knowledge, have been
> > implemented atop GCL. I am seriously considering writing an
> > implementation. I have a personal preference for using Simple
> > Streams as I
--- Stephen Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A large drawback is that neither, to my knowledge, have been
> implemented atop GCL. I am seriously considering writing an
> implementation. I have a personal preference for using Simple
> Streams as I believe it mostly succeeded in addressing is
Steve,
You're way ahead of me on the curve on this one.
I'm unable to use CLOS until Axiom lives under ANSI.
That said, I do see the long term advantage of taking streams
from various places using a common API. A networked version of
Axiom, a browser-based version of Axiom (something I've looked
Tim, *,
One of the non-standard extensions (that is, not defined by the ANSI
Lisp specification) which most Lisp systems offer in one form or
another is a CLOS based stream library. The most widespread of which
are Gray Streams[1], and a newer design promoted by Franz known as Simple
Streams[2].
10 matches
Mail list logo
