[slime-devel] Re: [Maxima] Slime vs Maxima's nregex

[C Y]

--- Nikodemus Siivola <nikodemus at random-state.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 6 Jun 2005, Raymond Toy wrote:
> 
> > While playing with Maxima and slime, I've run into a problem.
> > Both maxima and slime use the nregex package.  This would be ok, 
> > but we've modified nregex slightly to make it do what we want, 
> > and the changes are compatible with slime's version.

Are or aren't compatible?  If not, is there some way the difference
could be resolved?

> > To prevent collision, I propose we change the package that
> > nregex is in from NREGEX to MAXIMA-NREGEX.  This shouldn't be 
> > a problem and should prevent collisions with other NREGEX 
> > packages in use.

That should work OK.

> Might it be less work for both Slime and Maxima in the long run to
> register nregex on sourceforge or clnet, or even just keep it in
> a separate module within either project's CVS, so that there would
> once again be an upstream for it?

It depends on if our changes are compatible with other systems changes
- I take it you're thinking to try and maintain one "universal" nregex
that does what both Slime and Maxima (plus whoever else uses it) needs?

CY

P.S. - I'm going to try and investigate what combinations of
Slime+Maxima+<various lisp implementations> work - Raymond found that
the mp option wasn't necessary when he tried it, so it might be a more
general approach than I had originally assumed.  One question - if this
does in fact work, would it make sense for Maxima to bundle swank in
the default image in order to have a "debugging on demand" option which
wouldn't involve tracking down a SLIME install and trying to compile
the current swank on whatever lisp version Maxima is using, or is it
preferable to keep it separate in order to be sure that the Slime and
swank versions in use are the same?

Also, a (minor) security question - since remote connections to swank
are possible (and potentially very useful!) is there some kind of
password protection and encryption that can be enabled for non-local
hookups?  emacs being emacs, if a user attacks a swank port they
essentially could use emacs to do virtually anything your local
security permits.  Or am I missing something?

Note to self - are remote Maxima session connects possible as well
using emaxima?  Should look into that.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com