root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| >We have found that for a moderately large project (say over 10,000
| >lines of code) an outline (or even a set of outlines) is not enough.
| >We rely heavily on a LaTeX table of contents (our best analog to a Leo
| >outline), but we also rely on diagrams and ove
Norman Ramsey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| I have said for years that if you want better documentation, don't
| look to your tools---look to your *process*. The good news is that
| almost any kind kind of process will work: you just need multiple eyes
| to review the documents, and you need acco
Hi Bill,
... noweb modifications ...
The bottom line here is that I agree with Norman that
modifying noweb's behavior is not the correct solution
and that if anything it should be more exact and strict.
Actually, I did not say that I want to modify noweb in any way.
To me it was only not clea
> Unfortunately, the website http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~nr/noweb/ is not
> very explicit about pointing to a nice documentation that describes the
> semantics of all the various situations where << and >> can appear
> (non-escaped) in a simple and understandable manner.
The definitive answe
On Friday, May 05, 2006 12:02 PM I wrote:
> ...
> Unfortunately developers still often use editing tools that
> do not properly hide the internal representation of the
> literate document so that on input the escape syntax can
> sometimes seem quite inconvenient. I think the problem
> really lies
Ralf, Norman, Tim, et al.
>
> Ralf Hemmecke wrote:
> >
> > The only place where I think it would be necessary to
> > escape << is if an = sign immediately follows the >>
> > AND the << starts at the first column. In all other
> > situations the line should be output by noweb literally
> > and
> Hello, is somebody so familiar with the documentation of noweb, to point
> exactly at a place in the documentation that says something about what
> noweb SHOULD do if it sees
>
><>
>
> in either documentation or code chunk?
>
> The only place where I think it would be necessary
Hello, is somebody so familiar with the documentation of noweb, to point
exactly at a place in the documentation that says something about what
noweb SHOULD do if it sees
<>
in either documentation or code chunk?
The only place where I think it would be necessary to escape << is if
an = s
On 05/05/2006 11:59 AM, Martin Rubey wrote:
"Page, Bill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Thursday, May 04, 2006 10:47 AM Martin Rubey wrote:
...
Things to do on the interpreter side needed for the
axiom-combinat project:
* make it understand Aldor:
* dependent types
* extend
* creatin
"Page, Bill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thursday, May 04, 2006 10:47 AM Martin Rubey wrote:
> > ...
> > Things to do on the interpreter side needed for the
> > axiom-combinat project:
> >
> > * make it understand Aldor:
> >
> > * dependent types
> > * extend
> > * creating domains
In the file ' src/interp/fnewmeta.lisp.pamphlet' the text:
<<' Name '>>
is not really a reference to a chunk but noweb thinks it is
and the standard (designed in) behavior of noweb when it
finds such an "undefined chunk" is simply to omit it. This
breaks the Axiom code.
Maybe that is a bug,
Martin Rubey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
| > Martin has a very good summary. Many reserachers and potential
| > contributors out there are not interested in learning Lisp just to be
| > able to use Axiom, which already requires its own language.
"Page, Bill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Gaby,
|
| On Thursday, May 04, 2006 10:48 AM you wrote:
| > ...
| > I read the message saw other problems that people mentioned. I
| > (mis)interpreted Ralf's statement as saying that it was a bug
| > in noweb -- that is now corrected.
| >
|
| There
On Thursday, May 04, 2006 10:47 AM Martin Rubey wrote:
> ...
> Things to do on the interpreter side needed for the
> axiom-combinat project:
>
> * make it understand Aldor:
>
> * dependent types
> * extend
> * creating domains on the command line
>
Is what you are suggesting the same thi
Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Martin has a very good summary. Many reserachers and potential
> contributors out there are not interested in learning Lisp just to be
> able to use Axiom, which already requires its own language. That make
> the number of people capable to maintain
On 05/04/2006 10:53 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
Ralf Hemmecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Hi Bill, hello Gaby,
|
| Look at this...
|
| http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/axiom-developer/2005-12/msg00262.html
Many thanks.
Obviously, there have been many talks about this noweb thingy. I ju
Gaby,
On Thursday, May 04, 2006 10:48 AM you wrote:
> ...
> I read the message saw other problems that people mentioned. I
> (mis)interpreted Ralf's statement as saying that it was a bug
> in noweb -- that is now corrected.
>
There was a bug in noweb that was corrected in a recent version
but
Martin Rubey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
| And I'm absolutely certain that I don't want to understand how noweb works. No
| matter whether it is coded in Lisp, Aldor or C.
Hear! Hear! Hear!
Martin has a very good summary. Many reserachers and potential
contributors out there are not inte
"Page, Bill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Thursday, May 04, 2006 4:54 AM Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| >
| > Ralf Hemmecke writes:
| >
| > |
| > | Look at this...
| > |
| http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/axiom-developer/2005-12/msg00262.html
| >
| > Many thanks.
| > Obviously, there have bee
C Y <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> --- root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > i'd much rather reduce the number of languages need to understand axiom
> > rather than enlarge the number. some are necessary (like lisp, spad, aldor)
> > but some are optional (e.g. java in the aldor merge) and more pro
--- root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i'd much rather reduce the number of languages need to understand
> axiom rather than enlarge the number. some are necessary (like
> lisp, spad, aldor) but some are optional (e.g. java in the aldor
> merge) and more properly should be done using existing tools
On Thursday, May 04, 2006 4:54 AM Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>
> Ralf Hemmecke writes:
>
> |
> | Look at this...
> |
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/axiom-developer/2005-12/msg00262.html
>
> Many thanks.
> Obviously, there have been many talks about this noweb thingy.
> I just don't understand
Ralf Hemmecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Hi Bill, hello Gaby,
|
| Look at this...
|
| http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/axiom-developer/2005-12/msg00262.html
Many thanks.
Obviously, there have been many talks about this noweb thingy. I just
don't understand why it lingers for so long.
| I
root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
| 2) sed and awk are NOT standard parts of a windows distribution.
| again as a matter of policy we need to reduce the requirements
| so we can work across a larger number of systems. ideally all
| of axiom would run in common lisp and porting becomes a co
[Norman Ramsey's awk script...]
Really, this script is not so hard to understand is it?
yes, it is. really. it just reads as line noise to me. for example,
the variable 'uses' is not defined anywhere. nor is 'defns'.
what exactly is it trying to iterate over and where does the
data come from? t
Hi Bill, hello Gaby,
Look at this...
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/axiom-developer/2005-12/msg00262.html
I would even say: Throw away the noweb sources, throw away this awk
script and rather go to the Axiom sources and correct a usage of an
undefined chunk. Why would one want to have unde
Tim,
On Wednesday, May 03, 2006 11:57 PM you wrote:
>
> 3) ...
>
> the noweb script will be sitting in a standalone pamphlet in
> src/scripts. it will not appear as an integral part of anything
> to a future maintainer.
> ...
Although this script is not so important in the overall toolset
fo
Tim,
On Wednesday, May 03, 2006 11:57 PM you wrote:
> ...
> three points:
>
> 1) perl, python, asp, javascript, etc are all part of any standard
> linux distribution ...
>
> as a policy i favor minimizing the number of languages used.
> adding sed (1 language), awk (a second), clever bash shel
> Get serious! awk is a standard unix tool and is part of every
> linux distribution. It has been around for at least as long
> the C programming language. We make no attempt to explain C
> programming or even lisp programming to anyone, so why should
> we need to explain awk?
three points:
1) pe
Gaby,
On Wednesday, May 03, 2006 11:05 PM you wrote:
> ...
> | *) if noweb is installed check to see if the filter already
> | exists
>
> I can do this if I'm given sufficient detail of how to detect
> the problem and where the filter could possibly reside.
>
It would make good sense t
Tim,
You wrote:
> ...
> Bill Page wrote:
> > Really, this script is not so hard to understand is it?
>
> yes, it is. really. it just reads as line noise to me. for
> example, the variable 'uses' is not defined anywhere. nor
> is 'defns'. what exactly is it trying to iterate over and
> where does
root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Bill,
|
| > Please forgive my irritation but this issue *has* been discussed
| > repeatedly on this list. Most recently see:
|
| i realize that the current solution is an irritation to you.
| i'd suggest that you check out a copy of axiom and integrate
| the pa
Bill,
> Please forgive my irritation but this issue *has* been discussed
> repeatedly on this list. Most recently see:
i realize that the current solution is an irritation to you.
i'd suggest that you check out a copy of axiom and integrate
the patch. it's not as simple as it seems. fully integra
Gaby,
Thanks for your continuing work on the Axiom Silver branch! :)
On Wednesday, May 03, 2006 4:36 PM you wrote:
> ...
> Tim Daly (root) wrote:
> | modules.c is one way to fix the noweb bug. i've submitted it
> | as a patch to norman ramsey but he rejected it saying that i
> | should use sed/a
Greetings!
Just wondering if there were any ideas or progress on this front.
Take care,
Camm Maguire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Greetings!
>
> With current cvs 2.6.8pre, I just took your patch, and changed the
> GCLVERSION to gcl-system in both Makefile and Makefile.pamphlet. Then
> I poin
Greetings!
With current cvs 2.6.8pre, I just took your patch, and changed the
GCLVERSION to gcl-system in both Makefile and Makefile.pamphlet. Then
I pointed the PATH to ~/gcl-2.6.8pre/bin:$PATH, set the AXIOM env
variable as you instructed, and make AWK=awk.
I get down to the following:
tangli
i took your suggestion and rewrote plttest.c to add the line:
long findstring(char *a, char *b);
but it had no effect.
when you built axiom did you modify the makefiles to use
GCLVERSION=gcl-2.6.8pre
or did you build the lisp by hand and copy it over?
or did you use your debian mod and compil
Greetings! Odd, I see:
Loading /Users/camm/axiom/obj/MACOSX/interp/cformat.o
start address -T 0xccf500 Finished loading
/Users/camm/axiom/obj/MACOSX/interp/cformat.o
Loading /Users/camm/axiom/obj/MACOSX/interp/cfuns.o
start address -T 0xc41880 Finished loading
/Users/camm/axiom/obj/MACOSX/inter
different error message. there is progress. now it is loading the
lisp code that was compiled but it fails loading cfuns.o which
is C code that gets compiled and linked into the image. the source
is in src/lib/cfuns.c.pamphlet. the message is
Loading /home/daly/macosx46/obj/MACOSX/interp/cfuns.o
E
Greetings!
OK, think I got it now, will know for sure in a bit. Might want to
try a fresh update of 2.6.8pre at this point.
Please keep me posted.
Take care,
root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> still fails at the same spot in the same way.
>
> > OK, please try again with
> >
> > export CVSRO
still fails at the same spot in the same way.
> OK, please try again with
>
> export CVSROOT=:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/sources/gcl
> cd gcl-2.6.8pre/o && cvs update plttest.c && make plt.o \
> && cd ../unixport && make saved_gcl
>
> Or try a fresh checkout if you wish.
>
> Please kee
OK, please try again with
export CVSROOT=:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/sources/gcl
cd gcl-2.6.8pre/o && cvs update plttest.c && make plt.o \
&& cd ../unixport && make saved_gcl
Or try a fresh checkout if you wish.
Please keep me posted. I'll explain what is going on if you are
interested
Greetings!
First let me say I'm totally fine with shipping gcl sources with axiom
as is. The below is just an attempt to explore the other possibility
in more detail.
root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> you ARE aware that gcl includes things like bfd, binutils, gmp, etc.
> axiom isn't the only
--- root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sbcl just got itself working on windows.
> i'm trying to build it to see if they got mcclim working.
> if so, we have a cross-platform gui.
Unfortunately, McCLIM currently requires clx to work (there is no
Windows backend even in the works yet).
> an alte
sbcl just got itself working on windows.
i'm trying to build it to see if they got mcclim working.
if so, we have a cross-platform gui.
an alternative i'm also investigating is gtk+ and libglade
it seems that gaim uses it and works everywhere.
if they can, we can.
t
--- root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> an alternative is to modify GCL to support UFFI (Universal
> Foreign Function Interface) and modify Axiom to use it. I
> looked at this path and it is a lot of work. When Axiom goes
> ANSI it'll have to be done but that's still a long way in the
> future and
46 matches
Mail list logo
