[armedbear-devel] long

[Alan Ruttenberg]

On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 12:34 AM, dmiles at users.sourceforge.net
<logicmoo at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 8:57 AM, Alessio Stalla <alessiostalla at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Alan Ruttenberg
>> <alanruttenberg at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mar 16, 2010, at 8:47 AM, dmiles at users.sourceforge.net wrote:
>
> The java lisp I work on has bignum types that get demoted and promoted
> as needed.

So, this begs the question: What is the difference between your lisp
and ABCL? Is your lisp ready for consumption? Does it make sense to
combine efforts?

I'm intrigued as I see it's associated with LarKC, and mostly I use
ABCL for projects related to ontology and semweb.

-Alan

>
> SubLFixnum  -> int
> SubLLongBignum -> long
> SubLBigIntBignum -> BigInteger
>
> The code is at http://larkc.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/larkc/branches/LarKC_CommonLisp_Extensions/platform/src/com/cyc/tool/subl/jrtl/nativeCode/type/number/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>> -Alan
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 11:47 PM, Alan Ruttenberg
>>>> <alanruttenberg at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Am I right to observe that abcl coerces any number > fixnum size to bigint?
>>>>> I'm having trouble calling a java method that takes a long. I seem to
>>>>> have worked around it calling the method with (new 'long
>>>>> "9223372036854775807") rather than 9223372036854775807 .
>>>>>
>>>>> Is this the desired behavior?
>>>>>
>>>>> -Alan
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> armedbear-devel mailing list
>>>>> armedbear-devel at common-lisp.net
>>>>> http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/armedbear-devel
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> armedbear-devel mailing list
>>> armedbear-devel at common-lisp.net
>>> http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/armedbear-devel
>>>
>>
>