From: Björn Lindberg
Subject: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <3DDB898B.489F2A67@nada.kth.se>
I have started learning Common Lisp on my own. So far, it is very
interesting. I have experience from several different languages, and CL
seems to be very powerful.
My question concerns how you work in Lisp, and how you use your working
environment. The trouble is, I don't know anyone in real life using CL.
I have installed Ilisp and Clisp (I will probably install CMUCL as well
later). So I added auto-mode-alist entries for lisp files in my .emacs,
and fire up an emacs. I run M-x run-ilisp with clisp, and I get a split
window with the lisp file buffer and a buffer with the clisp process.
I am curious how to best do my work. Do you usually jump back and forth
with C-x o, writing forms in the file buffer and then running them in
the clisp buffer, or do you just work in the file buffer, and then
eventually do a (load "file.lisp") from clisp?
I guess I am interested in best working practices in the described
environment, so that I can find a "best" way.
(BTW, I have been lurking for a while, and I must say that I am
impressed by the quality of content in this group, especially
considering it is not moderated.)
Bj�rn
Bj�rn Lindberg <·······@nada.kth.se> writes:
> I have started learning Common Lisp on my own. So far, it is very
> interesting. I have experience from several different languages, and CL
> seems to be very powerful.
>
> My question concerns how you work in Lisp, and how you use your working
> environment. The trouble is, I don't know anyone in real life using CL.
> I have installed Ilisp and Clisp (I will probably install CMUCL as well
> later). So I added auto-mode-alist entries for lisp files in my .emacs,
> and fire up an emacs. I run M-x run-ilisp with clisp, and I get a split
> window with the lisp file buffer and a buffer with the clisp process.
>
> I am curious how to best do my work. Do you usually jump back and forth
> with C-x o, writing forms in the file buffer and then running them in
> the clisp buffer, or do you just work in the file buffer, and then
> eventually do a (load "file.lisp") from clisp?
Check the functions "compile-defun-lisp" and "eval-defun-lisp"
--- there is no reason to "work" in the *clisp* buffer at all.
--
Raymond Wiker Mail: ·············@fast.no
Senior Software Engineer Web: http://www.fast.no/
Fast Search & Transfer ASA Phone: +47 23 01 11 60
P.O. Box 1677 Vika Fax: +47 35 54 87 99
NO-0120 Oslo, NORWAY Mob: +47 48 01 11 60
Try FAST Search: http://alltheweb.com/
From: Gerard Flynn
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <ari904$pao$1@upsn21.u-psud.fr>
Raymond Wiker wrote:
> Bj�rn Lindberg <·······@nada.kth.se> writes:
>
>> I have started learning Common Lisp on my own. So far, it is very
>> interesting. I have experience from several different languages, and CL
>> seems to be very powerful.
>>
>> My question concerns how you work in Lisp, and how you use your working
>> environment. The trouble is, I don't know anyone in real life using CL.
>> I have installed Ilisp and Clisp (I will probably install CMUCL as well
>> later). So I added auto-mode-alist entries for lisp files in my .emacs,
>> and fire up an emacs. I run M-x run-ilisp with clisp, and I get a split
>> window with the lisp file buffer and a buffer with the clisp process.
>>
>> I am curious how to best do my work. Do you usually jump back and forth
>> with C-x o, writing forms in the file buffer and then running them in
>> the clisp buffer, or do you just work in the file buffer, and then
>> eventually do a (load "file.lisp") from clisp?
>
> Check the functions "compile-defun-lisp" and "eval-defun-lisp"
> --- there is no reason to "work" in the *clisp* buffer at all.
>
But then how do you see the output from your functions ?
Gerard Flynn
Gerard Flynn <·····@lure.u-psud.fr> writes:
> Raymond Wiker wrote:
>
> > Check the functions "compile-defun-lisp" and "eval-defun-lisp"
> > --- there is no reason to "work" in the *clisp* buffer at all.
> >
>
> But then how do you see the output from your functions ?
Maybe you should just try it and see?
--
Raymond Wiker Mail: ·············@fast.no
Senior Software Engineer Web: http://www.fast.no/
Fast Search & Transfer ASA Phone: +47 23 01 11 60
P.O. Box 1677 Vika Fax: +47 35 54 87 99
NO-0120 Oslo, NORWAY Mob: +47 48 01 11 60
Try FAST Search: http://alltheweb.com/
From: Gerard Flynn
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <aril40$1fh$1@upsn21.u-psud.fr>
Raymond Wiker wrote:
> Gerard Flynn <·····@lure.u-psud.fr> writes:
>
>> Raymond Wiker wrote:
>>
>> > Check the functions "compile-defun-lisp" and "eval-defun-lisp"
>> > --- there is no reason to "work" in the *clisp* buffer at all.
>> >
>>
>> But then how do you see the output from your functions ?
>
> Maybe you should just try it and see?
>
I see. Thanks for the tip.
Gerard Flynn
Minor question:
Since I installed ilisp, the indentation of if blocks has changed with the
'then' expression indented more than the 'else' expression. Here is an
example:
(defun my-max (x y)
(if (> x y)
x
y))
Is it supposed to look like that?
-----= 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, Nov 21, 2002 at 07:18:44AM -0700, Chris Gehlker wrote:
> Minor question:
>
> Since I installed ilisp, the indentation of if blocks has changed with the
> 'then' expression indented more than the 'else' expression. Here is an
> example:
>
> (defun my-max (x y)
> (if (> x y)
> x
> y))
>
> Is it supposed to look like that?
Try:
(setq lisp-indent-function #'common-lisp-indent-function)
in your .emacs
--
; Matthew Danish <·······@andrew.cmu.edu>
; OpenPGP public key: C24B6010 on keyring.debian.org
; Signed or encrypted mail welcome.
; "There is no dark side of the moon really; matter of fact, it's all dark."
On 11/21/02 11:05 AM, in article ·····················@lain.cheme.cmu.edu,
"Matthew Danish" <·······@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:
> (setq lisp-indent-function #'common-lisp-indent-function)
Much better. Thanks.
-----= 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! =-----
Hi Matthew Danish,
> Try:
>
> (setq lisp-indent-function #'common-lisp-indent-function)
>
> in your .emacs
This fixes the indentation of with-output-to-string, etc.:
(with-output-to-string (stream)
(write-line "great-we're-only-indented-two-characters" stream))
But how do you fix unknown functions:
(custom-with-output-to-string (stream)
(write-line "oops-we-no-longer-have-two-character-indentation" stream))
Thanks,
Adam
> But how do you fix unknown functions:
>
> (custom-with-output-to-string (stream)
> (write-line "oops-we-no-longer-have-two-character-indentation" stream))
To fix the confusion I have generated, I don't want to add a new line to
.emacs every time I create a new function. Rather I'd like to disable
indentation to the end of the function name. Perhaps some forms will look
odd, like loop. Compare:
(loop for element in list
collect element)
with:
(loop for element in list
collect element)
But then we're all used to:
(defun fn (arg)
arg)
Instead of:
(defun fn (arg)
arg)
To put it another way, perhaps I can reverse the Emacs default so that
everything is indented by 2 unless otherwise specified.
Regards,
Adam
I mused:
> To put it another way, perhaps I can reverse the Emacs default so that
> everything is indented by 2 unless otherwise specified.
The answer seems to be no, not without a lot of work. The Common Lisp
specific indentation is already disabled when indenting to the end of a
function name. Thanks Alain.
Regards,
Adam
From: Martti Halminen
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <3DDD180D.BEFE9AF4@kolumbus.fi>
Chris Gehlker wrote:
>
> Minor question:
>
> Since I installed ilisp, the indentation of if blocks has changed with the
> 'then' expression indented more than the 'else' expression. Here is an
> example:
>
> (defun my-max (x y)
> (if (> x y)
> x
> y))
>
> Is it supposed to look like that?
Looks like the ordinary way to indent CL IF to me.
Come to think of it, is there any definite documentation on what would
be the "correct" way to indent CL code? Most of the time I just use
whatever emacs does, though occasionally I disagree (this was probably
on some earlier version, using e-lisp indentation on CL...)
--
Martti Halminen <···············@kolumbus.fi> writes:
> Chris Gehlker wrote:
> >
> > Minor question:
> >
> > Since I installed ilisp, the indentation of if blocks has changed with the
> > 'then' expression indented more than the 'else' expression. Here is an
> > example:
> >
> > (defun my-max (x y)
> > (if (> x y)
> > x
> > y))
> >
> > Is it supposed to look like that?
>
> Looks like the ordinary way to indent CL IF to me.
>
> Come to think of it, is there any definite documentation on what would
> be the "correct" way to indent CL code? Most of the time I just use
> whatever emacs does, though occasionally I disagree (this was probably
> on some earlier version, using e-lisp indentation on CL...)
I beg to differ, and I think that Emacs CL indentation rules agree
with me :)
The above is a left over from ELisp and the time when IF hade the form
'(' 'if' <test> <then-form> <else-form>* ')'
In CL we have
'(' 'if' <test> <then-form> <else-form> ')'
Hence, IMHO, the above is better indented as
(defun my-max (x y)
(if (> x y)
x
y))
Cheers
--
Marco Antoniotti ========================================================
NYU Courant Bioinformatics Group tel. +1 - 212 - 998 3488
715 Broadway 10th Floor fax +1 - 212 - 995 4122
New York, NY 10003, USA http://bioinformatics.cat.nyu.edu
"Hello New York! We'll do what we can!"
Bill Murray in `Ghostbusters'.
From: Martti Halminen
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <3DDD758D.B1D8AC4F@kolumbus.fi>
Marco Antoniotti wrote:
>
> Martti Halminen <···············@kolumbus.fi> writes:
> > > (defun my-max (x y)
> > > (if (> x y)
> > > x
> > > y))
> > >
> > > Is it supposed to look like that?
> > Looks like the ordinary way to indent CL IF to me.
> >
> > Come to think of it, is there any definite documentation on what would
> > be the "correct" way to indent CL code? Most of the time I just use
> > whatever emacs does, though occasionally I disagree (this was probably
> > on some earlier version, using e-lisp indentation on CL...)
> I beg to differ, and I think that Emacs CL indentation rules agree
> with me :)
> Hence, IMHO, the above is better indented as
>
> (defun my-max (x y)
> (if (> x y)
> x
> y))
Oh well, on further investigation Zmacs seems to default to doing it
your way, too. Time to change my style :-)
(this machine seems to default to the stepped indentation, haven't dug
out where this takes the definitions from. That (setq
lisp-indent-function #'common-lisp-indent-function) didn't change
anything on this one. Wrong version? This is GNU emacs 20.7)
--
On 11/21/02 5:08 PM, in article ·················@kolumbus.fi, "Martti
Halminen" <···············@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
>
> (this machine seems to default to the stepped indentation, haven't dug
> out where this takes the definitions from. That (setq
> lisp-indent-function #'common-lisp-indent-function) didn't change
> anything on this one. Wrong version? This is GNU emacs 20.7)
Mine says "GNU Emacs 21.1.1" and the
(setq lisp-indent-function #'common-lisp-indent-function)
Worked here.
-----= 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! =-----
Martti Halminen <···············@kolumbus.fi> writes:
> > Hence, IMHO, the above is better indented as
> >
> > (defun my-max (x y)
> > (if (> x y)
> > x
> > y))
>
> Oh well, on further investigation Zmacs seems to default to doing it
> your way, too. Time to change my style :-)
No it doesn't. Zmacs indent IF like this:
(defun my-max (x y)
(if (> x y)
x
y))
I think MCL will indent IF with two spaces. The LispWorks editor
defaults to the EMACS style indentation. I always stick the form
below in my init file to enable the indentation style I prefer.
(editor:setup-indent "if" 2 4 4)
Bj�rn Lindberg <·······@nada.kth.se> writes:
> I am curious how to best do my work. Do you usually jump back and forth
> with C-x o, writing forms in the file buffer and then running them in
> the clisp buffer, or do you just work in the file buffer, and then
> eventually do a (load "file.lisp") from clisp?
When you are in the source file buffer there should be a menu called
Ilisp at the top of the emacs window. Have a look in there, starting
off with the "evaluate" and "compile" sub-menus. The keybindings which
allow you to circumvent the menu altogether are displayed within the
menu.
Alternatively you can find the same information throgh C-h m
(describe-mode), though it's a bit less obvious that way.
I just started using ilisp-20020831 on Emacs 21.2 on
FreeBSD 4.7. (Is this combination supposed to work?)
Some first impressions/observations:
Documentation seems a bit out of date. You have to
go over the commands one by one to correct the doc
on what the actual FSF-compliant key binding is.
Sometimes in the *Help* output there is garbled output
in the bottom portion.
C-c M-g (ilisp-grow-output) doesn't seem to work even
though it is listed in the output of C-h b. Error
message is "Attempt to delete minibuffer or sole
ordinary window".
C-X C-e (eval-last-sexp) which used to send the previous
sexp to the inferior Lisp no longer seems to. Instead
it seems to send it to Emacs Lisp now which is of course
not what you want. I am wondering why the old behavior
could not have been preserved as an alternative to the new
C-c C-e and C-c M-e and C-M-x ?
arglist-lisp is C-c C-q not the C-z a in the documentation
(or the C-z C-a that you would have expected under
the FSF-compliant bindings). I wonder why.
Similarly for documentation-lisp (C-c C-f) and
describe-lisp (C-c TAB). Their bindings seem arbitrary
and nowhere near the C-z d and C-z i specified in
the documentation.
I had to disable WindowMaker from capturing Alt-H
(Hide window) in order to use C-c M-h for hyperspec-lookup.
By default WindowMaker also captures Alt-M (Minimize
window), which keeps you from using M-m for back-to-indentation.
Since I don't use M-m, I let WindowMaker have Alt-M
for now.
Macroexpansion is C-c M-0 and C-c M-1 which collides
with WindowMaker Alt-0, Alt-1, Alt-2, etc. for
switching between workspaces. Since I don't think I want
to give up the Alt-1, Alt-2, etc., what is a good
rebinding for the ilisp macroexpansion functions?
There doesn't seem to be an "eval buffer" or a
"compile buffer". Instead, it looks like you have to
load-file-lisp or compile-file-lisp.
The source code commands don't seem to have their
documented bindings (e.g., M-. and M-, ). I am guessing
that the motivation for this is if you use FSF-compliant
bindings, ilisp doesn't change the traditional bindings
of those.
All the comment functions and bindings in emacs seem
non-intuitive to begin with (C-x ; C-M-j M-j
M-x comment-region C-x f). I guess the only way
is just to learn them by rote. Even then, if you
stop using them for some time, you forget.
To this soup, ilisp adds C-c ; and it redefines M-j
so you have to spend some time figuring what the new
or changed functionality is. For example, between
M-x comment-region and the new C-c ; (comment-region-lisp).
These are just some initial observations. I haven't tried
many other functions like debugger interface yet.
I suppose it's great in the better-than-anything-out-there
sense. But I can see how the learning curve could be
steep, especially for newcomers to emacs. Not quite
your smooth out-of-box experience. For experts only, it
looks like.
I still miss the ability though to point your Symbolics
mouse pointer at a left parenthesis and with one click copy
the entire expression to where the text pointer is.
What was that whole technology..."presentations"?
It could be done in GNU emacs, could it not?
··········@yahoo.com (Pratibha) writes:
Thanks for the report.
This is food for the ilisp-{help,······@lists dot sourceforge punto net
mailing lists.
Cheers
> I just started using ilisp-20020831 on Emacs 21.2 on
> FreeBSD 4.7. (Is this combination supposed to work?)
> Some first impressions/observations:
>
> Documentation seems a bit out of date. You have to
> go over the commands one by one to correct the doc
> on what the actual FSF-compliant key binding is.
>
> Sometimes in the *Help* output there is garbled output
> in the bottom portion.
>
> C-c M-g (ilisp-grow-output) doesn't seem to work even
> though it is listed in the output of C-h b. Error
> message is "Attempt to delete minibuffer or sole
> ordinary window".
>
> C-X C-e (eval-last-sexp) which used to send the previous
> sexp to the inferior Lisp no longer seems to. Instead
> it seems to send it to Emacs Lisp now which is of course
> not what you want. I am wondering why the old behavior
> could not have been preserved as an alternative to the new
> C-c C-e and C-c M-e and C-M-x ?
>
> arglist-lisp is C-c C-q not the C-z a in the documentation
> (or the C-z C-a that you would have expected under
> the FSF-compliant bindings). I wonder why.
>
> Similarly for documentation-lisp (C-c C-f) and
> describe-lisp (C-c TAB). Their bindings seem arbitrary
> and nowhere near the C-z d and C-z i specified in
> the documentation.
>
> I had to disable WindowMaker from capturing Alt-H
> (Hide window) in order to use C-c M-h for hyperspec-lookup.
> By default WindowMaker also captures Alt-M (Minimize
> window), which keeps you from using M-m for back-to-indentation.
> Since I don't use M-m, I let WindowMaker have Alt-M
> for now.
>
> Macroexpansion is C-c M-0 and C-c M-1 which collides
> with WindowMaker Alt-0, Alt-1, Alt-2, etc. for
> switching between workspaces. Since I don't think I want
> to give up the Alt-1, Alt-2, etc., what is a good
> rebinding for the ilisp macroexpansion functions?
>
> There doesn't seem to be an "eval buffer" or a
> "compile buffer". Instead, it looks like you have to
> load-file-lisp or compile-file-lisp.
>
> The source code commands don't seem to have their
> documented bindings (e.g., M-. and M-, ). I am guessing
> that the motivation for this is if you use FSF-compliant
> bindings, ilisp doesn't change the traditional bindings
> of those.
>
> All the comment functions and bindings in emacs seem
> non-intuitive to begin with (C-x ; C-M-j M-j
> M-x comment-region C-x f). I guess the only way
> is just to learn them by rote. Even then, if you
> stop using them for some time, you forget.
>
> To this soup, ilisp adds C-c ; and it redefines M-j
> so you have to spend some time figuring what the new
> or changed functionality is. For example, between
> M-x comment-region and the new C-c ; (comment-region-lisp).
>
> These are just some initial observations. I haven't tried
> many other functions like debugger interface yet.
>
> I suppose it's great in the better-than-anything-out-there
> sense. But I can see how the learning curve could be
> steep, especially for newcomers to emacs. Not quite
> your smooth out-of-box experience. For experts only, it
> looks like.
>
> I still miss the ability though to point your Symbolics
> mouse pointer at a left parenthesis and with one click copy
> the entire expression to where the text pointer is.
> What was that whole technology..."presentations"?
> It could be done in GNU emacs, could it not?
--
Marco Antoniotti ========================================================
NYU Courant Bioinformatics Group tel. +1 - 212 - 998 3488
715 Broadway 10th Floor fax +1 - 212 - 995 4122
New York, NY 10003, USA http://bioinformatics.cat.nyu.edu
"Hello New York! We'll do what we can!"
Bill Murray in `Ghostbusters'.
From: Wolfgang Mederle
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <54hira.3h.ln@DS9.mederle.de>
··········@yahoo.com wrote:
> I had to disable WindowMaker from capturing Alt-H
> (Hide window) in order to use C-c M-h for hyperspec-lookup.
> By default WindowMaker also captures Alt-M (Minimize
> window), which keeps you from using M-m for back-to-indentation.
> Since I don't use M-m, I let WindowMaker have Alt-M
> for now.
You can use xmodmap to assign Alt and Meta to different keys. I use a
Windows (105 key) keyboard where the left Windows key is mapped to
Meta-L and the left Alt key is mapped to Alt-L. Then, let WindowMaker
have Alt, and the Meta key won't interfere with the window manager
anymore.
--
Wolfgang Mederle
From: Hannu Koivisto
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <87lm3n2iit.fsf@lynx.ionific.com>
··········@yahoo.com (Pratibha) writes:
> I just started using ilisp-20020831 on Emacs 21.2 on
> FreeBSD 4.7. (Is this combination supposed to work?)
I'm not aware of any issues specific to that combination.
> Documentation seems a bit out of date. You have to
> go over the commands one by one to correct the doc
> on what the actual FSF-compliant key binding is.
The documentation explains how to map the old keybindings to their
FSF-compliant equivalents. I don't actually know whether those
instructions work but even if they do, I agree this is suboptimal.
On the other hand it's not that critical since you can use menus,
C-h m and C-h w, for example, for figuring out keybindings (I find
them more convenient than using the documentation, even if the
documentation referred to the right keybindings). Also note that
the non-FSF-compliant keybindings are still the default.
> Sometimes in the *Help* output there is garbled output
> in the bottom portion.
Something like this seems to happen when the loaded version of
ILISP (or some other Emacs package) is not the same as the version
you have compiled on disk or something similar; I'm not sure
exactly what is the real cause but something seems to be "out of
sync", because compiling and starting everything afresh has helped
to fix such problems.
If something else seems to be the cause in your case, please report
it as a bug to the mailing list.
> C-c M-g (ilisp-grow-output) doesn't seem to work even
> though it is listed in the output of C-h b. Error
> message is "Attempt to delete minibuffer or sole
> ordinary window".
Please report this as a bug to the mailing list and include all
possible information.
> C-X C-e (eval-last-sexp) which used to send the previous
> sexp to the inferior Lisp no longer seems to. Instead
> it seems to send it to Emacs Lisp now which is of course
> not what you want. I am wondering why the old behavior
> could not have been preserved as an alternative to the new
> C-c C-e and C-c M-e and C-M-x ?
It could have been preserved. In my opinion the FSF bindings and
actually the whole internal keybinding code in ILISP should be
rewritten, but I haven't yet had time to do that.
> arglist-lisp is C-c C-q not the C-z a in the documentation
> (or the C-z C-a that you would have expected under
> the FSF-compliant bindings). I wonder why.
I wonder that too. As I said, the bindings should be redone.
> Similarly for documentation-lisp (C-c C-f) and
> describe-lisp (C-c TAB). Their bindings seem arbitrary
> and nowhere near the C-z d and C-z i specified in
> the documentation.
Ditto.
> I had to disable WindowMaker from capturing Alt-H
> (Hide window) in order to use C-c M-h for hyperspec-lookup.
> By default WindowMaker also captures Alt-M (Minimize
> window), which keeps you from using M-m for back-to-indentation.
> Since I don't use M-m, I let WindowMaker have Alt-M
> for now.
>
> Macroexpansion is C-c M-0 and C-c M-1 which collides
> with WindowMaker Alt-0, Alt-1, Alt-2, etc. for
> switching between workspaces. Since I don't think I want
> to give up the Alt-1, Alt-2, etc., what is a good
> rebinding for the ilisp macroexpansion functions?
You let your window manager eat many bindings that are useful
elsewhere in Emacs and other programs as well. Perhaps you should
consider having separate Alt and Meta keys on your keyboard. Or
bind your window manager stuff behind Super or Hyper.
> There doesn't seem to be an "eval buffer" or a
> "compile buffer". Instead, it looks like you have to
> load-file-lisp or compile-file-lisp.
I'd recommend those but as an alternative you can mark the entire
buffer (C-x h) and then use the commands that operate on a region.
> The source code commands don't seem to have their
> documented bindings (e.g., M-. and M-, ). I am guessing
> that the motivation for this is if you use FSF-compliant
> bindings, ilisp doesn't change the traditional bindings
> of those.
Most likely. This came up recently on Lispers' IRC channel as
well. If the tags fallback functionality of ILISP's
edit-definitions-lisp worked properly, I think it would be
reasonable to bind it to M-.
> All the comment functions and bindings in emacs seem
> non-intuitive to begin with (C-x ; C-M-j M-j
> M-x comment-region C-x f). I guess the only way
I can't see what C-x f is doing in that list. C-M-j is simply an
alternative for M-j. I find M-j easy to remember as "that other
C-j". Concerning M-x comment-region RET, you can comment
regions more easily with M-;
> To this soup, ilisp adds C-c ; and it redefines M-j
Hm. ILISP doesn't redefine M-j for me. Just ignore C-c ; if you
already know sufficient non-ILISP-specific functionality.
> These are just some initial observations. I haven't tried
> many other functions like debugger interface yet.
>
> I suppose it's great in the better-than-anything-out-there
> sense. But I can see how the learning curve could be
> steep, especially for newcomers to emacs. Not quite
> your smooth out-of-box experience. For experts only, it
I agree. ILISP could use overhauling (or perhaps even rewriting)
but like so many applications, since it does the work somehow, it's
hard to invest volunteer time and energy for such large
improvements that it would need.
If someone wants to fund this work, I'm all ears.
> I still miss the ability though to point your Symbolics
> mouse pointer at a left parenthesis and with one click copy
> the entire expression to where the text pointer is.
> What was that whole technology..."presentations"?
> It could be done in GNU emacs, could it not?
I would have thought that the presentation stuff wouldn't apply in
Zmacs in an ordinary editing situation where no one is expecting
"any lisp expression" type of input. But maybe it does somehow; I
need to check the manuals or boot my Symbolics later today. In any
case, all kinds of cool stuff similar to what one can easily
achieved with presentations could certainly be implemented to ILISP
with the help of text properties and overlays etc. but just don't
expect that Emacs can be turned into Genera.
--
Hannu
From: Alain Picard
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <87u1ibjh14.fsf@optushome.com.au>
··········@yahoo.com (Pratibha) writes:
> Macroexpansion is C-c M-0 and C-c M-1 which collides
> with WindowMaker Alt-0, Alt-1, Alt-2, etc. for
> switching between workspaces. Since I don't think I want
> to give up the Alt-1, Alt-2, etc., what is a good
> rebinding for the ilisp macroexpansion functions?
I personally like to turn those useless "windows" keys
on my keyboard into Super and Hyper modifiers, and go
crazy rebinding those. [Super-m], for example, sounds
like a good mnemonic for macroexpand.
>> There doesn't seem to be an "eval buffer" or a
> "compile buffer". Instead, it looks like you have to
> load-file-lisp or compile-file-lisp.
Well, a buffer is usually tied to a file, so C-c C-l
to load (ilisp will prompt for compilation if the sources
are stale with respect to the compiled version) seems to work fine.
> All the comment functions and bindings in emacs seem
> non-intuitive to begin with (C-x ; C-M-j M-j
Actually, it's M-;, which, to me seems _very_ intuitive,
as ; is the comment character. And I bind C-c ; to
comment-region.
> I still miss the ability though to point your Symbolics
> mouse pointer at a left parenthesis and with one click copy
> the entire expression to where the text pointer is.
> What was that whole technology..."presentations"?
> It could be done in GNU emacs, could it not?
Yes, but for now, you can do C-M-<spacebar> followed by M-w.
> But I can see how the learning curve could be
> steep, especially for newcomers to emacs. Not quite
> your smooth out-of-box experience. For experts only, it
> looks like.
Emacs is a bit like that, but the way I see it, I spend 8hrs
a day in front of a text editor, so it might as well be one
which will grow with me forever rather than one I'll master
in a couple of days and which will annoy me forever. When
you become an emacs expert, it's much like watching a pianist;
they don't think about what notes to play, they think about
what feeling they want to convey through their music. You'll
completely forget that you're hitting keystrokes, much less have
to remember what they are.
Persevere---it's worth it.
Now if only someone wrote a hack to swap control and caps-lock
on an iBook running Linux. :-(
Alain Picard <·······················@optushome.com.au> writes:
> Now if only someone wrote a hack to swap control and caps-lock
> on an iBook running Linux. :-(
Can't you do this with xmodmap?
--
Raymond Wiker Mail: ·············@fast.no
Senior Software Engineer Web: http://www.fast.no/
Fast Search & Transfer ASA Phone: +47 23 01 11 60
P.O. Box 1677 Vika Fax: +47 35 54 87 99
NO-0120 Oslo, NORWAY Mob: +47 48 01 11 60
Try FAST Search: http://alltheweb.com/
Raymond Wiker <·············@fast.no> writes:
> Alain Picard <·······················@optushome.com.au> writes:
>
> > Now if only someone wrote a hack to swap control and caps-lock
> > on an iBook running Linux. :-(
>
> Can't you do this with xmodmap?
I think the hardware of the keyboard makes this challenging. Less
wires to the caps lock key, or something.
Cheers,
M.
who, it has become clear, is never going to get around to installing
linux on his ibook.
--
Two things I learned for sure during a particularly intense acid
trip in my own lost youth: (1) everything is a trivial special case
of something else; and, (2) death is a bunch of blue spheres.
-- Tim Peters, 1 May 1998
Michael Hudson <···@python.net> writes:
> Raymond Wiker <·············@fast.no> writes:
>
> > Alain Picard <·······················@optushome.com.au> writes:
> >
> > > Now if only someone wrote a hack to swap control and caps-lock
> > > on an iBook running Linux. :-(
> >
> > Can't you do this with xmodmap?
>
> I think the hardware of the keyboard makes this challenging. Less
> wires to the caps lock key, or something.
Probably not... I just tried the following on my iBook,
running XDarwin with a Norwegian keyboard:
xmodmap -e 'keycode 67 = Caps_Lock' -e 'keycode 65 = Control_L' \
-e 'clear lock' -e 'clear control' -e 'add lock = Caps_Lock' \
-e 'add control = Control_L' -e 'add control = Control_R'
This works, except for the LED in the Caps_Lock key...
Actually, on re-checking the man page for xmodmap, there is
an example which is almost completely the same as the sequence above.
> Cheers,
> M.
> who, it has become clear, is never going to get around to installing
> linux on his ibook.
Now, why would you do a fool thing like that anyway :-?
--
Raymond Wiker Mail: ·············@fast.no
Senior Software Engineer Web: http://www.fast.no/
Fast Search & Transfer ASA Phone: +47 23 01 11 60
P.O. Box 1677 Vika Fax: +47 35 54 87 99
NO-0120 Oslo, NORWAY Mob: +47 48 01 11 60
Try FAST Search: http://alltheweb.com/
Raymond Wiker <·············@fast.no> writes:
> Michael Hudson <···@python.net> writes:
>
> > Raymond Wiker <·············@fast.no> writes:
> >
> > > Alain Picard <·······················@optushome.com.au> writes:
> > >
> > > > Now if only someone wrote a hack to swap control and caps-lock
> > > > on an iBook running Linux. :-(
> > >
> > > Can't you do this with xmodmap?
> >
> > I think the hardware of the keyboard makes this challenging. Less
> > wires to the caps lock key, or something.
>
> Probably not... I just tried the following on my iBook,
> running XDarwin with a Norwegian keyboard:
>
> xmodmap -e 'keycode 67 = Caps_Lock' -e 'keycode 65 = Control_L' \
> -e 'clear lock' -e 'clear control' -e 'add lock = Caps_Lock' \
> -e 'add control = Control_L' -e 'add control = Control_R'
>
> This works, except for the LED in the Caps_Lock key...
I spake to soon... it works, except for the LED in the
Caps_Lock key, and the fact that the Caps_Lock key does not, in fact,
give me Control.
--
Raymond Wiker Mail: ·············@fast.no
Senior Software Engineer Web: http://www.fast.no/
Fast Search & Transfer ASA Phone: +47 23 01 11 60
P.O. Box 1677 Vika Fax: +47 35 54 87 99
NO-0120 Oslo, NORWAY Mob: +47 48 01 11 60
Try FAST Search: http://alltheweb.com/
>>>>> "Raymond" == Raymond Wiker <·············@fast.no> writes:
Raymond> Raymond Wiker <·············@fast.no> writes:
>>
>> xmodmap -e 'keycode 67 = Caps_Lock' -e 'keycode 65 = Control_L' \
>> -e 'clear lock' -e 'clear control' -e 'add lock = Caps_Lock' \
>> -e 'add control = Control_L' -e 'add control = Control_R'
>>
>> This works, except for the LED in the Caps_Lock key...
Raymond> I spake to soon... it works, except for the LED in the
Raymond> Caps_Lock key, and the fact that the Caps_Lock key does not, in fact,
Raymond> give me Control.
I think there was some thread about this a month ago. Anyway, Google
for ucontrol. This will do what you want. The LED is still weird.
Unfortunately, ucontrol doesn't always get loaded on startup for some
reason.
Ray
From: Alain Picard
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <87lm3mj7nl.fsf@optushome.com.au>
Raymond Toy <···@rtp.ericsson.se> writes:
>
> I think there was some thread about this a month ago. Anyway, Google
> for ucontrol. This will do what you want. The LED is still weird.
> Unfortunately, ucontrol doesn't always get loaded on startup for some
> reason.
>
I think I pointed you to uControl. But unfortunately, it will
NOT do the trick: we are discussing doing this remapping
under _linux_ on an iBook, not under Mac OS X.
I've found emacs under OS X to be flaky and prone to crashes,
and, since it's what I use 95% of my tube-time, I've gone back
to linux.
Maybe when they get the bugs out, I can switch back to OS X; I
hope I haven't gone carpal by then. :-(
Alain Picard <·······················@optushome.com.au> writes:
> Raymond Toy <···@rtp.ericsson.se> writes:
>
> >
> > I think there was some thread about this a month ago. Anyway, Google
> > for ucontrol. This will do what you want. The LED is still weird.
> > Unfortunately, ucontrol doesn't always get loaded on startup for some
> > reason.
> >
>
> I think I pointed you to uControl. But unfortunately, it will
> NOT do the trick: we are discussing doing this remapping
> under _linux_ on an iBook, not under Mac OS X.
>
> I've found emacs under OS X to be flaky and prone to crashes,
> and, since it's what I use 95% of my tube-time, I've gone back
> to linux.
Were you using Carbon, Aqua, X11, or terminal Emacs? I've been using
X11 Emacs under OS X since August, with fewer problems than emacs 21
has given me on any other machine. Plus remote display :). If you
got a pre-packaged binary, you might try compiling it yourself.
> Maybe when they get the bugs out, I can switch back to OS X; I
> hope I haven't gone carpal by then. :-(
I wouldn't hold my breath. Emacs 21 seems to be more in the business
of adding bugs than removing them. I'd try to find a stable version,
and stick with it. I started pretesting in summer 2001, and its
stability has been all over the place -- waiting won't necessarily
make it better. FWIW, late August / early September was a good time
for Emacs 21 in CVS, if the release was giving you problems.
I wish I could use 20.7 under OS X :-(
--
/|_ .-----------------------.
,' .\ / | No to Imperialist war |
,--' _,' | Wage class war! |
/ / `-----------------------'
( -. |
| ) |
(`-. '--.)
`. )----'
From: Alain Picard
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <87d6ovak8r.fsf@optushome.com.au>
···@famine.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) writes:
> Were you using Carbon, Aqua, X11, or terminal Emacs?
>
The Aqua emacs, which now builds "out of the box" on OS X.
> I've been using
> X11 Emacs under OS X since August, with fewer problems than emacs 21
> has given me on any other machine. Plus remote display :). If you
> got a pre-packaged binary, you might try compiling it yourself.
Yes, I guess only running it under X would be ok. It just seems so
silly to have to run all of XDarwin just to run emacs. :-(
> I wouldn't hold my breath. Emacs 21 seems to be more in the business
> of adding bugs than removing them.
You're telling me. I've even considered switching to Xemacs it's so bad.
> I wish I could use 20.7 under OS X :-(
That would be ideal, I agree.
From: Tim Bradshaw
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <ey3zns3ltfl.fsf@cley.com>
* Bj�rn Lindberg wrote:
> I am curious how to best do my work. Do you usually jump back and forth
> with C-x o, writing forms in the file buffer and then running them in
> the clisp buffer, or do you just work in the file buffer, and then
> eventually do a (load "file.lisp") from clisp?
I evaluate definitions straight from the source file buffer, with
whatever key sequence does that (C-M-x? C-M-c?), and switch to the
listener buffer to actually call functions and test things or muck
about. Generally on sane machines (Unix/Linux) I put the listener
buffer in a different window-system window so I can just move to it by
moving the mouse without having type key sequences or otherwise press
buttons. This doesn't work on Windows, sigh.
> (BTW, I have been lurking for a while, and I must say that I am
> impressed by the quality of content in this group, especially
> considering it is not moderated.)
Shurely shome mistake? *Everyone* knows,that the main reason - the
only reason in fact - for Lisp's failure to take over the world is
because everyone in cll are snotty arrogant primadonnas - many of them
frequently expound this theory at great length in this very
newsgroup. I mean, look at this article: first I casually insult the
world's most popular OS, then I continue with sarcastic off-topic
remarks. Why, in my day, people like me would have been locked up!
--tim
From: Björn Lindberg
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <3DDC2E3B.38CB66FB@nada.kth.se>
Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> > I am curious how to best do my work. Do you usually jump back and forth
> > with C-x o, writing forms in the file buffer and then running them in
> > the clisp buffer, or do you just work in the file buffer, and then
> > eventually do a (load "file.lisp") from clisp?
>
> I evaluate definitions straight from the source file buffer, with
> whatever key sequence does that (C-M-x? C-M-c?), and switch to the
> listener buffer to actually call functions and test things or muck
> about.
In the Ilisp menu in my emacs, it says that C-z e evaluates "defun", and
C-z n evaluates the next sexp. I have no idea what the difference is,
but the last one works for me. There doesn't seem to be one for
evaluating the whole buffer though.
> Generally on sane machines (Unix/Linux) I put the listener
> buffer in a different window-system window so I can just move to it by
> moving the mouse without having type key sequences or otherwise press
> buttons.
How do you do this? That is the way I usually do it when I work in eg
C++ or Python. I do my source editing in emacs, and then just move the
mouse to a terminal window to run the program. Do you mean that you just
start another emacs frame?
> This doesn't work on Windows, sigh.
I don't care for Windows.
> Shurely shome mistake? *Everyone* knows,that the main reason - the
> only reason in fact - for Lisp's failure to take over the world is
> because everyone in cll are snotty arrogant primadonnas - many of them
> frequently expound this theory at great length in this very
> newsgroup. I mean, look at this article: first I casually insult the
> world's most popular OS, then I continue with sarcastic off-topic
> remarks. Why, in my day, people like me would have been locked up!
Well, yes of course you are all snotty primadonnas, but the quality of
content is still good! I came to this group because I am interested in
learning CL, so I care more about the information quality than a bit of
arrogance.
Besides, I find that newgroups are usually full of strong opinions
anyway, the difference is if they are voiced by truly knowledgeable
people or just loud-mouths in general.
Bj�rn
From: Tim Bradshaw
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <ey3vg2rl3ll.fsf@cley.com>
* Bj�rn Lindberg wrote:
> How do you do this? That is the way I usually do it when I work in eg
> C++ or Python. I do my source editing in emacs, and then just move the
> mouse to a terminal window to run the program. Do you mean that you just
> start another emacs frame?
Yes with some C-x 5 combination, and then arrange that the inferior
lisp buffer is in one frame on its own (usually a smaller one than the
other frames...).
> Well, yes of course you are all snotty primadonnas, but the quality of
> content is still good! I came to this group because I am interested in
> learning CL, so I care more about the information quality than a bit of
> arrogance.
Well, it's good to hear someone being *nice* about cll for a change!
(I apologise for my terrible grammar in the bit you quoted by the way
- it made me cringe when I saw it...)
--tim
From: Björn Lindberg
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <3DDD6E66.E9D98739@nada.kth.se>
Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> > How do you do this? That is the way I usually do it when I work in eg
> > C++ or Python. I do my source editing in emacs, and then just move the
> > mouse to a terminal window to run the program. Do you mean that you just
> > start another emacs frame?
>
> Yes with some C-x 5 combination, and then arrange that the inferior
> lisp buffer is in one frame on its own (usually a smaller one than the
> other frames...).
I'm doing this now, and it works well. Thanks. I have a perhaps
unrelated question though; when I run Clisp by itself, I get tab
completion on all lisp symbols which is convenient, but I don't get that
when running Clisp from within Emacs. Is there a way to make it work
inside Emacs too? I'm thinking of the Clisp buffer, but of course it
would be a nice feature to have in the file buffer as well.
Bj�rn
From: Johannes Grødem
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <lzlm3mwjys.fsf@unity.copyleft.no>
* Bj�rn Lindberg <·······@nada.kth.se>:
> I'm doing this now, and it works well. Thanks. I have a perhaps
> unrelated question though; when I run Clisp by itself, I get tab
> completion on all lisp symbols which is convenient, but I don't get that
> when running Clisp from within Emacs.
Use complete-lisp. It is bound to M-tab by default. (And it works in
both the source- and interaction-buffer.) This will get you
completion for Lisps that don't have their own tab-completion, too,
such as CMUCL.
--
Johannes Gr�dem <OpenPGP: 5055654C>
From: Alain Picard
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <87bs4ij6wd.fsf@optushome.com.au>
Tim Bradshaw <···@cley.com> writes:
>
> Yes with some C-x 5 combination, and then arrange that the inferior
> lisp buffer is in one frame on its own (usually a smaller one than the
> other frames...).
I actually like having the listener behave normally, but send the
_output_ of interactions (C-M-x, C-c C-n etc) to its own frame, by
using something like
(defun ilisp-display-output-in-fixed-frame (output &optional sink)
(with-output-to-temp-buffer " *Output*"
(princ output)))
(setq ilisp-display-output-function 'ilisp-display-output-in-fixed-frame)
;; and then make that frame look distinctive and unobtrusive
(setq special-display-buffer-names
'((" *Output*"
(minibuffer . nil)
(menu-bar-lines .nil)
(title . "Xanalys Common Lisp (Output)")
(font . "-*-fixed-bold-*-*-*-15-*-*-*-*-*-*-*") (top . 0)
(left - 0)
(height . 10)
(unsplittable . t)
(auto-raise . nil)
(background-color . "blue4")
(foreground-color . "white")
(width . 70))))
"Bj�rn Lindberg" <·······@nada.kth.se> wrote in message
······················@nada.kth.se...
> Tim Bradshaw wrote:
>
> > > I am curious how to best do my work. Do you usually jump back and
forth
> > > with C-x o, writing forms in the file buffer and then running them in
> > > the clisp buffer, or do you just work in the file buffer, and then
> > > eventually do a (load "file.lisp") from clisp?
> >
> > I evaluate definitions straight from the source file buffer, with
> > whatever key sequence does that (C-M-x? C-M-c?), and switch to the
> > listener buffer to actually call functions and test things or muck
> > about.
>
> In the Ilisp menu in my emacs, it says that C-z e evaluates "defun", and
> C-z n evaluates the next sexp. I have no idea what the difference is,
> but the last one works for me. There doesn't seem to be one for
> evaluating the whole buffer though.
C-c C-l will load the buffer (with an offer to compile first I believe..)
> Besides, I find that newgroups are usually full of strong opinions
> anyway, the difference is if they are voiced by truly knowledgeable
> people or just loud-mouths in general.
But everybody knows, the louder you are, the smarter you are! ;)
--
Coby Beck
(remove #\Space "coby 101 @ bigpond . com")
From: Wolfgang Mederle
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <cjgira.3h.ln@DS9.mederle.de>
Coby Beck wrote:
> C-c C-l will load the buffer (with an offer to compile first I
> believe..)
If you use the FSF-compliant keybindings. Otherwise, C-z l.
--
Wolfgang Mederle
················@stud.uni-muenchen.de
http://www.mederle.de/
ICQ# 1435333
From: Björn Lindberg
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <3DDD340D.F013B3DD@nada.kth.se>
Wolfgang Mederle wrote:
>
> Coby Beck wrote:
>
> > C-c C-l will load the buffer (with an offer to compile first I
> > believe..)
>
> If you use the FSF-compliant keybindings. Otherwise, C-z l.
Is there any advantage to using the FSF bindings? (And why are they
called FSF-compliant?)
Bj�rn
From: Wolfgang Mederle
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <argjra.fq.ln@DS9.mederle.de>
Bj�rn Lindberg wrote:
> Is there any advantage to using the FSF bindings? (And why are they
> called FSF-compliant?)
There are guidelines on which keybindings to use for GNU Emacs packages
so they won't overwrite keybindings set elsewhere. You can look them up
in the Elisp info files, under "Coding Conventions".
,---------[ info Elisp, node `Major Mode Conventions� ]
| The key sequences bound in a major mode keymap should usually
| start with `C-c', followed by a control character, a digit, or `{',
| `}', `<', `>', `:' or `;'. The other punctuation characters are
| reserved for minor modes, and ordinary letters are reserved for
| users.
`---------
--
Wolfgang Mederle
"As an added bonus NeXT Computers are Guaranteed NOT to run Windows XP!"
(www.blackholeinc.com)
From: Hannu Koivisto
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <87ptsz2pdq.fsf@lynx.ionific.com>
Tim Bradshaw <···@cley.com> writes:
> about. Generally on sane machines (Unix/Linux) I put the listener
> buffer in a different window-system window so I can just move to it by
> moving the mouse without having type key sequences or otherwise press
> buttons. This doesn't work on Windows, sigh.
I wouldn't expect that an Emacs (or some Emacs like editor) user
considers using alt-tab to switch between the editor and the
listener window less convenient than moving his hand from the
keyboard to the mouse and moving the mouse, but if that's what you
want, Google seems to find WWW sites (for example
<http://www.nesbitt.ca/windows-tips.html>) that explain how to
activate focus-follows-mouse mode in Windows. If for some reason
those instructions don't work in your Windows and you use Emacs,
there is also follow-mouse.el that according to the description
implements that kind of behaviour for Emacs windows (and frames).
--
Hannu
From: Tim Bradshaw
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <ey3isyrkw5j.fsf@cley.com>
* Hannu Koivisto wrote:
> I wouldn't expect that an Emacs (or some Emacs like editor) user
> considers using alt-tab to switch between the editor and the
> listener window less convenient than moving his hand from the
> keyboard to the mouse and moving the mouse,
Well, if alt-tab did the right thing, which it occasionally does.
It's more often `type alt-tab 35 times'. And the `mouse' on my windows
bos is between the G, H and B keys, which is not really a long way
from where my hands are.
> but if that's what you want, Google seems to find WWW sites (for
> example <http://www.nesbitt.ca/windows-tips.html>) that explain how
> to activate focus-follows-mouse mode in Windows.
I tried those, they're kind of ... exciting ... in the way you don't
want things to be.
--tim
From: Kurt B. Kaiser
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <m3isyr94e0.fsf@float.attbi.com>
Bj�rn Lindberg <·······@nada.kth.se> writes:
> (BTW, I have been lurking for a while, and I must say that I am
> impressed by the quality of content in this group, especially
> considering it is not moderated.)
BTW, where did you get the idea that it was unmoderated?
KBK
From: Björn Lindberg
Subject: Re: How to use Emacs + Ilisp as working environment?
Date:
Message-ID: <3DDC28DA.F3C53982@nada.kth.se>
"Kurt B. Kaiser" wrote:
>
> Bj�rn Lindberg <·······@nada.kth.se> writes:
>
> > (BTW, I have been lurking for a while, and I must say that I am
> > impressed by the quality of content in this group, especially
> > considering it is not moderated.)
>
> BTW, where did you get the idea that it was unmoderated?
It is not called "comp.lang.lisp.moderated".
Another hint is the volume of off-topic posts.
Bj�rn
Bj�rn Lindberg <·······@nada.kth.se> writes:
> "Kurt B. Kaiser" wrote:
> >
> > Bj�rn Lindberg <·······@nada.kth.se> writes:
> >
> > > (BTW, I have been lurking for a while, and I must say that I am
> > > impressed by the quality of content in this group, especially
> > > considering it is not moderated.)
> >
> > BTW, where did you get the idea that it was unmoderated?
>
> It is not called "comp.lang.lisp.moderated".
Although that means very little. A small minority of the moderated
newsgroups in the Big-8 end in 'moderated' (the statistics have been
posted to news.groups in the past by Jim Riley, iirc)
--
If you want divine justice, die.
-- Nick Seldon
Brian Palmer <·······@rescomp.Stanford.EDU> writes:
> Bj�rn Lindberg <·······@nada.kth.se> writes:
>
> > "Kurt B. Kaiser" wrote:
> > >
> > > Bj�rn Lindberg <·······@nada.kth.se> writes:
> > >
> > > > (BTW, I have been lurking for a while, and I must say that I am
> > > > impressed by the quality of content in this group, especially
> > > > considering it is not moderated.)
> > >
> > > BTW, where did you get the idea that it was unmoderated?
> >
> > It is not called "comp.lang.lisp.moderated".
>
> Although that means very little. A small minority of the moderated
> newsgroups in the Big-8 end in 'moderated' (the statistics have been
> posted to news.groups in the past by Jim Riley, iirc)
The lack of Approved: headers and the lack of a delay between posting
an article and it appearing on your server are more of a giveaway.
Cheers,
M.
--
Well, you pretty much need Microsoft stuff to get misbehaviours
bad enough to actually tear the time-space continuum. Luckily
for you, MS Internet Explorer is available for Solaris.
-- Calle Dybedahl, alt.sysadmin.recovery