From edi at agharta.de  Thu Mar  8 19:37:20 2007
From: edi at agharta.de (Edi Weitz)
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 20:37:20 +0100
Subject: [drakma-announce] New release 0.6.1 (was: [Bug Report] split-string
 behaves different in Lispworks and SBCL.)
In-Reply-To: <28b25c50703050013u21b4f3s4a2ba4e7d0273dae@mail.gmail.com>
	(Jianshi Huang's message of "Mon, 5 Mar 2007 17:13:09 +0900")
References: <28b25c50703050013u21b4f3s4a2ba4e7d0273dae@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ufy8fzfv3.fsf@agharta.de>

On Mon, 5 Mar 2007 17:13:09 +0900, "Jianshi Huang" <jianshi.huang at gmail.com> wrote:

> I updated drakma to 0.6.0 but found the cookie could not be parsed
> correctly in SBCL. So I traced down into the source code and found
> it's the problem of function split-string. But in Lispworks
> Personal, it works well. As the function split-string is a big
> extended loop macro. So I think it might be a bug in SBCL's loop
> facility. I also tested in Allegro CL and found it behaves the same
> as SBCL.  So which is correct?

OK, with the help of comp.lang.lisp[1] I've convinced myself that
SPLIT-STRING relied on unspecified (or too vaguely specified)
behaviour.  I've now released a new version which hopefully only uses
documented LOOP features.  Please test.

Thanks for the report,
Edi.


[1] http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_frm/thread/e4bf7cc93bb3c50a/fc5c10fed5382464#fc5c10fed5382464


From edi at agharta.de  Fri Mar  9 08:42:30 2007
From: edi at agharta.de (Edi Weitz)
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 09:42:30 +0100
Subject: [drakma-announce] New release 0.6.2 (Was: Release data on Drakma)
In-Reply-To: <20070309024841.GA24035@achilles.olympus.net> (Jeffrey
	Cunningham's message of "Thu, 8 Mar 2007 18:48:41 -0800")
References: <28b25c50703050013u21b4f3s4a2ba4e7d0273dae@mail.gmail.com>
	<ufy8fzfv3.fsf@agharta.de>
	<20070309024841.GA24035@achilles.olympus.net>
Message-ID: <ud53i6c5l.fsf_-_@agharta.de>

On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 18:48:41 -0800, Jeffrey Cunningham <jeffrey at cunningham.net> wrote:

> You might want to change the change year on your website for Drakma
> to 2007 (it says 2006).

Ah, yes, thanks.  I've made a new release to clean up this mess - no
code changes, though.