I've been spending some time with Garnet recently and I must say that
it has far exceeded my expectations and I am very impressed.
I'm curious though, is there any discussion list for it or any kind of
maintainership? The compile scripts for it are somewhat broken as it
complained about missing compiled files and gave weird messages about
reading files with compile-time errors. Setting the src/ directory as
the binary directory solved nearly all of these problems, and I think
I finally have every component working properly (it would be a shame
if everyone that tries to install it has to mess with the compile
scripts to get things like Gilt working). And if there are bugs to
report, are any of the Garnet implementors listening or able to put
time into fixes?
The postscript documentation for it is superb, no complaints there.
Anyways, it's the nicest GUI tool I've played with and it would be a
shame for such a cool piece of software to go unused and unmaintained.
Christopher
Christopher R. Barry wrote:
> I've been spending some time with Garnet recently and I must say that
> it has far exceeded my expectations and I am very impressed.
>
> I'm curious though, is there any discussion list for it or any kind of
> maintainership?
> ... And if there are bugs to
> report, are any of the Garnet implementors listening or able to puttime
> into fixes?
There's a home page on
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~garnet
It point to an FAQ which states that
.... bug reports and questions to ············@cs.cmu.edu or to
the garnet newsgroup comp.windows.garnet are usually answered by
a Garnet user.
I do not know whether either of these is really in use right now. I can't
remember when the last posting to the mailing list was - I have on file a
message from 1996 but I don't necessarily keep them all and I think there
have been a small number since then. I just tried searching for the
newsgroup on dejanews and did not come up with any articles.
You could try posting to the mailing list and see if anybody answers you.
(This used to be be set up to feed into the newsgroup, the feed was
one-way though because of spam problems: ie postings to the newsgroup are
no longer echoed to the mailing list.)
The original implementors may be listening (to garnet-users, that is) but
I strongly doubt whether you will be able to persuade anybody to fix
Garnet bugs for you anymore. The heyday has passed, it's all written in
C++ now.
Sigh.
- nick
In article <·················@harlequin.co.uk>,
Nick Levine <····@harlequin.co.uk> writes:
> Christopher R. Barry wrote:
>
>> I've been spending some time with Garnet recently and I must say that
>> it has far exceeded my expectations and I am very impressed.
>>
>> I'm curious though, is there any discussion list for it or any kind of
>> maintainership?
>
>> ... And if there are bugs to
>> report, are any of the Garnet implementors listening or able to puttime
>> into fixes?
> The original implementors may be listening (to garnet-users, that is) but
> I strongly doubt whether you will be able to persuade anybody to fix
> Garnet bugs for you anymore. The heyday has passed, it's all written in
> C++ now.
>
> Sigh.
>
> - nick
>
There's a couple of people on the cmucl-imp mailing list that fix bugs in
the cmucl version. I'm sure they'd be interested in seeing bug fixes and maybe
even bug reports. You can find the pointers to the mailing list on
www.cons.org:/cmucl
Mike McDonald
·······@mikemac.com
Nick Levine <····@harlequin.co.uk> writes:
>
> The original implementors may be listening (to garnet-users, that is) but
> I strongly doubt whether you will be able to persuade anybody to fix
> Garnet bugs for you anymore. The heyday has passed, it's all written in
> C++ now.
>
I will at least look at Garnet bug reports. I'm currently using it
for work and want to have as robust a version as possible. I've fixed
a couple of reported bugs in the last year or so.
I've incorporated all the patches I could find, along with a few bug
fixes of my own, into an unofficial distribution that compiles and
seems to run under CMUCL and Linux ACL 4.3 (with clx added, of
course).
The url for this unofficial distribution is
http://www2.cons.org:8000/ftp-area/cmucl/ports/garnet/
Also, if anyone has any garnet patches floating around that weren't
ever officially distributed in some form, I'd like to get them and try
to incorporate them into my unofficial distribution.
Garnet isn't as sophisticated as CLIM, but it is smaller,
well-documented, and has some nice capabilities. It's more capable
than other free toolkits, such as CLUE + CLIO or CLUE + XIT, and it's
smaller. My experience is that a CMUCL image with PCL, CLX and Garnet
is about as big as one with PCL, CLX and CLUE alone.
Garnet runs under X and on the Mac; if anyone has some spare time they
might want to play around with getting it to run under Corman Common
Lisp. Then you'd have a free lisp GUI toolkit that runs on all the
major platforms.
--
Fred Gilham ······@csl.sri.com
The vicissitudes of history, however, have not dissuaded them from
their earnest search for a "third way" between socialism and
capitalism, namely socialism. --- Fr. Richard John Neuhaus