[Ecls-list] Latest changes & request for comments
Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll
juanjose.garciaripoll at googlemail.com
Mon May 18 07:49:55 UTC 2009
On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 9:33 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis
<gdr at integrable-solutions.net> wrote:
> I just realized something that may explain our differing views.
> It appears to me that you seem to believe that ECL is required to
> load the binary file with a user-supplied extension, previously
> produced by COMPILE-FILE with non-NIL :OUTPUT-FILE.
But then Gabriel I do not get it. Why do you want COMPILE-FILE to
respect the user extension if the file is not going to be loadable.
COMPILE-FILE, LOAD, COMPILE-FILE-PATHNAME are all specified to be
consistent among each other.
Instituto de Física Fundamental, CSIC
c/ Serrano, 113b, Madrid 28009 (Spain)
More information about the ecl-devel