From jmckitrick at reedlarkeygroup.com Tue Mar 13 03:26:04 2007 From: jmckitrick at reedlarkeygroup.com (Jonathon McKitrick) Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 23:26:04 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Bese-devel] Getting arnesi to load Message-ID: <51867.68.44.154.215.1173756364.squirrel@reedlarkeygroup.com> Hi, I went through 5 pages of googling on 'arnesi swank' so I thought I'd just ask... what's the most direct way to get arnesi to load into slime without complaining that it can't find :swank package? I'm running sbcl 1.0.3, and I just got arnesi_dev from darcs today. Thanks! -- Jonathon McKitrick Reed Larkey Group From attila.lendvai at gmail.com Tue Mar 13 11:26:17 2007 From: attila.lendvai at gmail.com (Attila Lendvai) Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 12:26:17 +0100 Subject: [Bese-devel] Getting arnesi to load In-Reply-To: <51867.68.44.154.215.1173756364.squirrel@reedlarkeygroup.com> References: <51867.68.44.154.215.1173756364.squirrel@reedlarkeygroup.com> Message-ID: > what's the most direct way to get arnesi to load into slime without > complaining that it can't find :swank package? > > I'm running sbcl 1.0.3, and I just got arnesi_dev from darcs today. that's strange, it works fine here with the cvs sbcl and cvs slime and so did for a long time. the swank package should be available when slime is operational, so i have no idea what is different in your config. maybe common lisp controller? -- - attila "- The truth is that I've been too considerate, and so became unintentionally cruel... - I understand. - No, you don't understand! We don't speak the same language!" (Ingmar Bergman - Smultronst?llet) From attila.lendvai at gmail.com Tue Mar 13 12:26:52 2007 From: attila.lendvai at gmail.com (Attila Lendvai) Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 13:26:52 +0100 Subject: [Bese-devel] Fwd: arnesi patches In-Reply-To: <1d26dc7e0703010834m409b6cadx7526cea4dddb8cbb@mail.gmail.com> References: <1d26dc7e0703010834m409b6cadx7526cea4dddb8cbb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: dear list, i've received this mail directly, but i don't feel authoritive to apply all of them myself, so here it is forwarded. (except the csv fix, i've pushed it already) - attila ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Kilian Sprotte Date: Mar 1, 2007 5:34 PM Subject: arnesi patches To: Attila Lendvai Hi Attila, can I asked you to push the following patches? They result from a cleaning up process of my local branch.... arnesi.patch contains everything, but basically it concerns three different things: * csv.patch adds a few testcases and one that is fixed by the changes to parse-csv-string (double quoting like in 1,2,3,"hallo""" was not parsed correctly, but would be printed like that) * disjoin.patch just adds one new function * matcher.patch makes some small changes and adds a load-time-value form to match-case (I hope, it's a good idea.....) Thank you, cheers, Kilian -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: arnesi.patch Type: application/octet-stream Size: 7154 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jmckitrick at reedlarkeygroup.com Tue Mar 13 18:08:07 2007 From: jmckitrick at reedlarkeygroup.com (Jonathon McKitrick) Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 14:08:07 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Bese-devel] Getting arnesi to load In-Reply-To: References: <51867.68.44.154.215.1173756364.squirrel@reedlarkeygroup.com> Message-ID: <53229.68.44.154.215.1173809287.squirrel@reedlarkeygroup.com> On Tue, March 13, 2007 7:26 am, Attila Lendvai said: >> what's the most direct way to get arnesi to load into slime without >> complaining that it can't find :swank package? >> >> I'm running sbcl 1.0.3, and I just got arnesi_dev from darcs today. > > that's strange, it works fine here with the cvs sbcl and cvs slime and > so did for a long time. > > the swank package should be available when slime is operational, so i > have no idea what is different in your config. > > maybe common lisp controller? I'm not sure. I don't use the common lisp controller. I'm running on an Intel Mac, and I have all my packages installed in .sbcl/site and systems. Is there another way to get arnesi to load swank? Like I said, I'm loading it from SLIME, so it's obviously there. -- Jonathon McKitrick Reed Larkey Group From daniel at sentivision.com Tue Mar 13 18:14:33 2007 From: daniel at sentivision.com (Daniel Janus) Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 19:14:33 +0100 Subject: [Bese-devel] Getting arnesi to load In-Reply-To: <53229.68.44.154.215.1173809287.squirrel@reedlarkeygroup.com> References: <51867.68.44.154.215.1173756364.squirrel@reedlarkeygroup.com> <53229.68.44.154.215.1173809287.squirrel@reedlarkeygroup.com> Message-ID: <200703131914.33539.daniel@sentivision.com> On Tuesday 13 of March 2007 19:08, Jonathon McKitrick wrote: > Is there another way to get arnesi to load swank? Like I said, I'm > loading it from SLIME, so it's obviously there. Are you loading arnesi via ASDF? If so, you want your swank.asd (or at least a symlink to it) be visible on one of the paths in ASDF:*CENTRAL-REGISTRY*. I usually have one directory containing symlinks to all my .asd's, and I push that onto the central registry, and everything works fine. -- (with-best-regards '(Daniel Janus) :of 'Sentivision) From jmckitrick at reedlarkeygroup.com Tue Mar 13 21:02:08 2007 From: jmckitrick at reedlarkeygroup.com (Jonathon McKitrick) Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 17:02:08 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Bese-devel] Getting arnesi to load In-Reply-To: <200703131914.33539.daniel@sentivision.com> References: <51867.68.44.154.215.1173756364.squirrel@reedlarkeygroup.com> <53229.68.44.154.215.1173809287.squirrel@reedlarkeygroup.com> <200703131914.33539.daniel@sentivision.com> Message-ID: <1153.68.44.154.215.1173819728.squirrel@reedlarkeygroup.com> On Tue, March 13, 2007 2:14 pm, Daniel Janus said: > Are you loading arnesi via ASDF? If so, you want your swank.asd (or at > least > a symlink to it) be visible on one of the paths in > ASDF:*CENTRAL-REGISTRY*. > I usually have one directory containing symlinks to all my .asd's, and I > push > that onto the central registry, and everything works fine. Thank you! That solves the problem. Perhaps the documentation should have a note near the beginning that it is necessary to add a link to swank.asd in the systems directory even if you have slime installed and working. -- Jonathon McKitrick Reed Larkey Group From mbaringer at common-lisp.net Wed Mar 14 05:00:16 2007 From: mbaringer at common-lisp.net (Marco Baringer) Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 00:00:16 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Bese-devel] New patches to arnesi_dev: 13-Mar-2007 Message-ID: <20070314050016.B873772094@common-lisp.net> Wed Feb 28 11:32:22 EST 2007 kilian.sprotte at gmail.com * fixed test csv.2 M ./src/csv.lisp -1 +7 M ./t/csv.lisp -1 +4 Wed Feb 28 10:57:17 EST 2007 kilian.sprotte at gmail.com * added test-suite :it.bese.arnesi.csv; csv.2 fails M ./arnesi.asd +1 A ./t/csv.lisp An updated tarball of arnesi_dev's source can be downloaded here: http://common-lisp.net/project/bese/tarballs/arnesi_dev-20070313.tar.gz Darcsweb URL: http://uncommon-web.com/darcsweb/darcsweb.cgi?r=arnesi_dev;a=summary From john at fremlin.org Thu Mar 15 09:56:46 2007 From: john at fremlin.org (John Fremlin) Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 09:56:46 +0000 Subject: [Bese-devel] Patch to allow macrolet to work under with-call/cc Message-ID: <8764926d9d.fsf-genuine-vii@john.fremlin.org> It delays the evaluation of lambda forms making things more inefficient but allowing macrolet to work on cmucl/sbcl and clisp. It didn't before because they cannot serialise the lambda functions into fasl files. Any comments welcome as I am very new to lisp. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: arnesi_dev-20070313.patch Type: text/x-diff Size: 2753 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jmckitrick at reedlarkeygroup.com Tue Mar 20 16:43:20 2007 From: jmckitrick at reedlarkeygroup.com (Jonathon McKitrick) Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 12:43:20 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Bese-devel] Question about 5am macro design Message-ID: <3457.68.44.154.215.1174409000.squirrel@reedlarkeygroup.com> I have a lisp-related question about the design of the fixtures macro. I know that macros can have &body as a param, and then 'splice in' those forms with , at body without actually using the symbol BODY in the macro-calling code. But what is different about the fixture definition macro that we have to use (&body) in our own macro? -- Jonathon McKitrick Reed Larkey Group From mbaringer at common-lisp.net Tue Mar 27 05:05:04 2007 From: mbaringer at common-lisp.net (Marco Baringer) Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 00:05:04 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Bese-devel] New patches to fiveam: 26-Mar-2007 Message-ID: <20070327050504.B4CF17B019@common-lisp.net> Sat Mar 24 11:43:10 EST 2007 Marco Baringer * Added def-suite* macro M ./src/suite.lisp +5 Fri Mar 23 14:59:18 EST 2007 Marco Baringer * Drop spurious newline M ./src/packages.lisp -1 Fri Mar 23 14:56:25 EST 2007 Marco Baringer * Added :default-test-args parameter to def-suite. M ./src/classes.lisp -1 +5 M ./src/packages.lisp +1 M ./src/suite.lisp -8 +13 M ./src/test.lisp -36 +37 M ./t/tests.lisp -2 +7 Fri Mar 23 14:41:33 EST 2007 Marco Baringer * Added :fixture argument to TEST macro M ./src/test.lisp -11 +20 An updated tarball of fiveam's source can be downloaded here: http://common-lisp.net/project/bese/tarballs/fiveam-20070326.tar.gz Darcsweb URL: http://uncommon-web.com/darcsweb/darcsweb.cgi?r=fiveam;a=summary From rtvd at mail.ru Tue Mar 27 20:19:38 2007 From: rtvd at mail.ru (Denys Rtveliashvili) Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 00:19:38 +0400 Subject: [Bese-devel] just some non-technical thoughts about the UCW Message-ID: <46097C5A.9000507@mail.ru> Hi, I did not have a chance to track what's happening with the UnCommon Web for a long time. And I am pleased to see that the community is alive and the framework is still being developed. There is no doubt that the idea behind it is great as well as the framework's potential. I would gladly contribute somehow, but my LISP skills are extremely low. I guess there are some things I can do which could be useful. Anyway, I'd like to know your opinion first. Idea#1: -------- UnCommon Web's website and examples appearance can be improved. For instance, if you take a look at the Ruby On Rails or Django websites, you will see that they have a great design and it is easy to see some of the frameworks' features without even installing them on the own computer. http://www.rubyonrails.org/ http://www.djangoproject.com/ Do you think it has sense to work on the design to make it more attractive? I know, it's all bells and whistles but it improves the general feeling about the project. By the way, are there any logos for the UnCommon Web or one should be created? Idea#2: -------- The UnCommon Web's website looks like a number of static pages. Perhaps there is a good reason for it. Anyway.. What if the site is re-made to use the UnCommon Web framework? Of course, that would impose some restrictions on hosting but as a result, there will be no silent questions like "if it is so great, why it is not used for the project's own site?" Another good point here is that the project's website would be able to show the features of the framework and allow to play with it. In addition to this, it would be easy to see if something is broken in the latest build and give some experience in supporting a real-life application. Idea#3: -------- It seems to me that having a WIKI may be beneficial for the project. It would be possible to outline the latest features / issues there and have an overview of what the framework's state at the moment. Maybe that's not very important for core developers but the rest of the community might find it useful. And of course, it would be great if the WIKI is implemented with the UnCommon Web. :-) -------- With best regards, Denys Rtveliashvili From drewc at tech.coop Wed Mar 28 18:16:13 2007 From: drewc at tech.coop (Drew Crampsie) Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 11:16:13 -0700 Subject: [Bese-devel] UCW-CORE cleanup/separation-of-concerns patch vol. 1 In-Reply-To: <46097C5A.9000507@mail.ru> References: <46097C5A.9000507@mail.ru> Message-ID: <460AB0ED.7060004@tech.coop> Hello, Attached is the patch implementing actions and funcallable instances, and breaking just about everything else. Also included is a new test suite that covers the RERL. Only works in threaded lisps, but could be hacked to test remotely (as was at one point 'till i realized i don't care). May or may not work at all, let me know if i missed a file or something. Let the hacking commence! Cheers, drewc From attila.lendvai at gmail.com Wed Mar 28 22:37:00 2007 From: attila.lendvai at gmail.com (Attila Lendvai) Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 00:37:00 +0200 Subject: [Bese-devel] UCW-CORE cleanup/separation-of-concerns patch vol. 1 In-Reply-To: <460AB0ED.7060004@tech.coop> References: <46097C5A.9000507@mail.ru> <460AB0ED.7060004@tech.coop> Message-ID: > Attached is the patch implementing actions and funcallable instances, > and breaking just about everything else. fyi, i've got Drew's patches and i'll set up a repo and keep on cleaning up UCW. (the patch was too big for the list) the final goal is to have a single UCW repo with clearly separated pluggable systems that you can load on top of the lower layers starting from a bare RERL. first idea on module/layer boundaries (which may or may not work out in practice): 1. base RERL and session management 2. components and yaclml macros 3. call/cc features 4. ajax features (2 and 3 will probably refuse separation) i think this change will pretty much foil backwards compatibility at various points of the code, so it may or may not be a good time to make long standing non-backward-compatible changes. any ideas? i personally would use http://common-lisp.net/project/defclass-star/ (and use its automatically generated *-of and *-p accessors for :type boolean slots). i really like the consistency it gives, but please note that this would be a painful stab at backwards compatibility. so, unless Marco seconds this idea i'll not do this. i think it's a good time to drop everything whose sole purpose is backward compatibility. anything off the top of your heads? i'm planning to partially or completly remove the ucwctl code, because the start.lisp way is a better alternative. a good example for a possible cleanup is the dual use of the word "action". one is the DEFACTION meaning and the other is the REGISTER-ACTION meaning. to be honest i've never used DEFACTION. today its :isolated feature is already supported by the lower layers of the framework (where it fits better) and other then that it's just a mere defmethod/cc that implicitly names its component arg as SELF. so, what do you think about dropping it to resolve the above mentioned naming confusion? maybe the other macros, that depend on and implicit SELF variable (like CALL), should also be excluded from the standard UCW api? questions always keep popping up about them... opinions, ideas? -- - attila "- The truth is that I've been too considerate, and so became unintentionally cruel... - I understand. - No, you don't understand! We don't speak the same language!" (Ingmar Bergman - Smultronst?llet) From hbabcock at mac.com Thu Mar 29 01:10:30 2007 From: hbabcock at mac.com (Hazen Babcock) Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 21:10:30 -0400 Subject: [Bese-devel] UCW-CORE cleanup/separation-of-concerns patch vol. 1 In-Reply-To: References: <46097C5A.9000507@mail.ru> <460AB0ED.7060004@tech.coop> Message-ID: On Mar 28, 2007, at 6:37 PM, Attila Lendvai wrote: > a good example for a possible cleanup is the dual use of the word > "action". one is the DEFACTION meaning and the other is the > REGISTER-ACTION meaning. to be honest i've never used DEFACTION. today > its :isolated feature is already supported by the lower layers of the > framework (where it fits better) and other then that it's just a mere > defmethod/cc that implicitly names its component arg as SELF. so, what > do you think about dropping it to resolve the above mentioned naming > confusion? maybe the other macros, that depend on and implicit SELF > variable (like CALL), should also be excluded from the standard UCW > api? questions always keep popping up about them... Um, aren't "traditional" UCW applications basically composed of defaction and defcomponent forms? I know that I use it a lot. -Hazen From attila.lendvai at gmail.com Thu Mar 29 23:04:53 2007 From: attila.lendvai at gmail.com (Attila Lendvai) Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 01:04:53 +0200 Subject: [Bese-devel] UCW-CORE cleanup/separation-of-concerns patch vol. 1 In-Reply-To: References: <46097C5A.9000507@mail.ru> <460AB0ED.7060004@tech.coop> Message-ID: > Um, aren't "traditional" UCW applications basically composed of > defaction and defcomponent forms? I know that I use it a lot. the strongest counter argument against defaction is that it's a simple defmethod/cc, only with a different name. keeping track of when you are leaving the call/cc boundary is important and for newcomers its just a little harder with defmethod/cc hidden behind defaction. iow, in my view defaction in today's ucw code only introduces a new construct (to be learned, maintained, documented) without abstracting away much. and at the same time its name clashes with a completly different construct also called "action". the implicit self argument is also a little confusing for newcomers and questions always keep popping up about errors due to not being aware of this. i don't want to sound zealous about removing defaction, i don't really care because i already know what's behind it... i just wanted to make sure the con reasons are mentioned before i forget my newcomer days... :) -- - attila "- The truth is that I've been too considerate, and so became unintentionally cruel... - I understand. - No, you don't understand! We don't speak the same language!" (Ingmar Bergman - Smultronst?llet) From hbabcock at mac.com Fri Mar 30 02:31:06 2007 From: hbabcock at mac.com (Hazen Babcock) Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 22:31:06 -0400 Subject: [Bese-devel] UCW-CORE cleanup/separation-of-concerns patch vol. 1 In-Reply-To: References: <46097C5A.9000507@mail.ru> <460AB0ED.7060004@tech.coop> Message-ID: <71B2A4D2-D39D-44D4-A8E5-E79D4249057D@mac.com> On Mar 29, 2007, at 7:04 PM, Attila Lendvai wrote: >> Um, aren't "traditional" UCW applications basically composed of >> defaction and defcomponent forms? I know that I use it a lot. > > the strongest counter argument against defaction is that it's a simple > defmethod/cc, only with a different name. keeping track of when you > are leaving the call/cc boundary is important and for newcomers its > just a little harder with defmethod/cc hidden behind defaction. > > iow, in my view defaction in today's ucw code only introduces a new > construct (to be learned, maintained, documented) without abstracting > away much. and at the same time its name clashes with a completly > different construct also called "action". > > the implicit self argument is also a little confusing for newcomers > and questions always keep popping up about errors due to not being > aware of this. > > i don't want to sound zealous about removing defaction, i don't really > care because i already know what's behind it... i just wanted to make > sure the con reasons are mentioned before i forget my newcomer days... > :) Well, it also prints out a message that can be useful for tracking what sorts of things users are trying to do on your site. However I also don't want to sound too zealous about keeping it. I typically rolled it into another macro that put @body into a separate function that was called by defaction so that I could get more feedback from the compiler about errors I may have made. There will be a few UCW tutorials that will need updating... -Hazen From hamish at hamishharvey.com Fri Mar 30 10:41:28 2007 From: hamish at hamishharvey.com (Hamish Harvey) Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 11:41:28 +0100 Subject: [Bese-devel] UCW-CORE cleanup/separation-of-concerns patch vol. 1 In-Reply-To: (Attila Lendvai's message of "Fri, 30 Mar 2007 01:04:53 +0200") References: <46097C5A.9000507@mail.ru> <460AB0ED.7060004@tech.coop> Message-ID: <87y7lft3mv.fsf@ncl.ac.uk> "Attila Lendvai" writes: > the implicit self argument is also a little confusing for newcomers > and questions always keep popping up about errors due to not being > aware of this. I'm not using UCW at the moment, so you can make what you want of this, but I can confirm that the implicit argument is confusing to a newcomer. It would have been worse if I hadn't already been familiar with SLIME and its cross referencing facilities. Implicitly defined names are contrary established CL style for a reason. Hamish From fairchild.anthony at gmail.com Fri Mar 30 23:34:44 2007 From: fairchild.anthony at gmail.com (Anthony Fairchild) Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 16:34:44 -0700 Subject: [Bese-devel] Help injecting literal javascript code into parenscript code Message-ID: Hello, I have a parenscript question, not really relating to UCW. What I want to do is include some literal javascript into a block of parenscript code. The goal is to keep this deliverable to a single html file, so including a .js file isnt really an option. Here's an example of what I want to do, using a fictional JS:LITERAL-JS function to inject the javascript. (js:js-script (js:literal-js "function getElementPosition(elemID) { var offsetTrail = document.getElementById(elemID); var offsetLeft = 0; var offsetTop = 0; while (offsetTrail) { offsetLeft += offsetTrail.offsetLeft; offsetTop += offsetTrail.offsetTop; offsetTrail = offsetTrail.offsetParent; } if (navigator.userAgent.indexOf(\"Mac\") != -1 && typeof document.body.leftMargin != \"undefined\") { offsetLeft += document.body.leftMargin; offsetTop += document.body.topMargin; } return {left:offsetLeft, top:offsetTop}; }") (defun my-fun1 () ;; ... ) (defun my-fun2 () ;; ... )) I could always convert the javascript code to parenscript code, but that could be time consuming and I'm lazy in my old age. I dont know enough about extending parenscript to figure this out. There must be an easy way to do this, any ideas? Thanks in advance, Anthony -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: