[xuriella-devel] Xuriella vs Lispworks

[Raymond Wiker]

On Sep 5, 2011, at 21:22 , Raymond Wiker wrote:
> I'm mainly using Lispworks, and I've had a few problems getting Xuriella running. Looking at the xuriella-devel archives, I see that Frank Schorr reported this back in November 2009.
> 
> I have been able to get Xuriella to work by changing the order of clauses in the loop in xuriella::report-samples (as suggested by Frank), as well as a little bit of magic[1] that I haven't tried to figure out until now.
> 
> First of all: the loop clause in report-samples. My interpretation of the Hyperspec indicates that the order of clauses used in report-samples
> 
> (loop
>  for base-uri being each hash-key 
>  using (hash-value id)
>  in base-uris …
> 
> is non-conformant; the correct order should be something like 
> 
> (loop
>  for base-uri being each hash-key
>  in base-uris
>  using (hash-value id)
> 
> --- just like Frank suggested.
> 
> The two other issues that Frank reported are *probably* because he was running with lw:*default-character-element-type* set to 'base-char. Doing something like
> 
> (lw:set-default-character-element-type 'character) ;; or lw:simple-char
> 
> before trying to use xuriella (or cxml-stp) appears to do the necessary magic. 
> 
> Footnotes: 
> [1] Possibly just sufficiently advanced technology.

It turns out that there was also a bug in Lispworks <= 6.0, where literal strings in compiled code would be treated as strings of 'base-char, regardless of whatever lw:*default-character-element-encoding* had been set to. In Lispworks 6.1 this has been corrected, so the only thing that is required to compile and use Xuriella on Lispworks now is to change the order of two lines in report-samples. Any chance that this can be fixed?

Regards,
Raymond Wiker