* "Bogdan Norenko" <········@chat.ru>
> Of course, discussion about how to copy array to array and why lisp so
> good is more interesting than real problems. ;-(((
Useless whining is also more interesting to you than real problems. I
prefer what you complain about to your complaint. Note: You just showed
us a real problem with USENET to which Common Lisp is not a solution.
#:Erik
--
I found no peace in solitude.
I found no chaos in catastrophe.
-- :wumpscut:
> Useless whining is also more interesting to you than real problems. I
> prefer what you complain about to your complaint. Note: You just showed
> us a real problem with USENET to which Common Lisp is not a solution.
Still:
If *you* would implement a Tk binding for Clisp (for example): How much work
would that be (for you)?
And could I do it? I am not a very skilled programmer. What would have to be
done? I think the source of Clisp is in the public domain, so theoretically
O could compile it.)
(Sorry for the additional whining, but Tk is just a wonderful tool for
*rapid prototyping*.)
Janos Blazi
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
>>>>> "Janos" == Janos Blazi <······@hotmail.com> writes:
Janos> done? I think the source of Clisp is in the public domain, so theoretically
Clisp is *not* public domain. It has licensed under the GPL.
Ray
"Raymond Toy" <···@rtp.ericsson.se> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
···················@rtp.ericsson.se...
> >>>>> "Janos" == Janos Blazi <······@hotmail.com> writes:
>
> Janos> done? I think the source of Clisp is in the public domain, so
theoretically
>
> Clisp is *not* public domain. It has licensed under the GPL.
But does not the P in GPl stands for "public"?
J.B.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Janos Blazi wrote:
> "Raymond Toy" <···@rtp.ericsson.se> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> ···················@rtp.ericsson.se...
> > >>>>> "Janos" == Janos Blazi <······@hotmail.com> writes:
> >
> > Janos> done? I think the source of Clisp is in the public domain, so
> theoretically
> >
> > Clisp is *not* public domain. It has licensed under the GPL.
>
> But does not the P in GPl stands for "public"?
> J.B.
Does not the P in VPL stand for "panty"?
Actually, that explains a lot about the GPL....
Tim
"Janos Blazi" <······@hotmail.com> writes:
> "Raymond Toy" <···@rtp.ericsson.se> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> ···················@rtp.ericsson.se...
> > >>>>> "Janos" == Janos Blazi <······@hotmail.com> writes:
> >
> > Janos> done? I think the source of Clisp is in the public domain, so
> theoretically
> >
> > Clisp is *not* public domain. It has licensed under the GPL.
>
> But does not the P in GPl stands for "public"?
Yes, and the L stands for "License". Public domain stuff can be made
proprietary, GPL'd stuff can't. If you change GPL'd software *and*
distribute the modified software, you are legally obliged to make your
changes freely available. The same does not apply to public-domain,
where anyone can do anything they please (roughly).
Peter
(ps: don't feed the lawyers: they just lose their fear of humans)
In article <··········@goliath.newsfeeds.com>, Janos Blazi wrote:
>> Useless whining is also more interesting to you than real problems. I
>> prefer what you complain about to your complaint. Note: You just showed
>> us a real problem with USENET to which Common Lisp is not a solution.
>
>Still:
>If *you* would implement a Tk binding for Clisp (for example): How much work
>would that be (for you)?
>And could I do it? I am not a very skilled programmer. What would have to be
>done? I think the source of Clisp is in the public domain, so theoretically
>O could compile it.)
Well to be fair to the people who have spent years learning how to
program could you just look at this as an opertunity to improve your
skills in this area? If you still want someone else to do the job see
if you can come to some type of agreement, this is what I can
trade/pay you for your time. Remember this group seems to have lots
of people who are not willing to do the task for you but are willing
to help you do the task your self, if you show them that you
are trying to learn they WILL help you. I currently do not have the
knoledge to be one of them, yet.
marc
>
>(Sorry for the additional whining, but Tk is just a wonderful tool for
>*rapid prototyping*.)
>
>Janos Blazi
>
>
>
>
>-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
>http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
>-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
> Useless whining is also more interesting to you than real problems. I
> prefer what you complain about to your complaint. Note: You just showed
> us a real problem with USENET to which Common Lisp is not a solution.
Still:
If *you* would implement a Tk binding for Clisp (for example): How much work
would that be (for you)?
And could I do it? I am not a very skilled programmer. What would have to be
done? I think the source of Clisp is in the public domain, so theoretically
O could compile it.)
(Sorry for the additional whining, but Tk is just a wonderful tool for
*rapid prototyping*.)
Janos Blazi
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001 18:23:33 +0200, "Janos Blazi" <······@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> If *you* would implement a Tk binding for Clisp (for example): How much work
Have you tried lisp2wish/with-wish?
Paolo
--
EncyCMUCLopedia * Extensive collection of CMU Common Lisp documentation
http://cvs2.cons.org:8000/cmucl/doc/EncyCMUCLopedia/
"Bogdan Norenko" <········@chat.ru> wrote
> Of course, discussion about how to copy array to array and why lisp so
good
> is more interesting than real problems. ;-(((
But you got answers to your questions. It's just that you don't like them.
For instance, as others suggested you to do, I use FLI to access the WIN32
API under windows to make the GUI and I can assure you that it's really
quite powerful and easy to use, (thanks to CLOS).
To create any widget under Windows you just have to call the CreateWindowEx
function and that's it.
You can then define some classes to encapsulate the returned handle and to
process the Events you get.
For this, the CLOS multiple dispatch + the after, before and around methods
are great.
Why would you like to use some inferior tools like MFC?
Marc