...Franz seems to have upgraded their trial version to ACL7.
http://www.franz.com/downloads/
Don't have it to myself anymore. :(
[To the irony-challenged: if you are on Windows or Linux, run do not
walk to the above URL.]
--
Kenny
Why Lisp? http://lisp.tech.coop/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
"I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and I'm happy to state
I finally won out over it."
Elwood P. Dowd, "Harvey", 1950
Kenny Tilton wrote:
> ...Franz seems to have upgraded their trial version to ACL7.
>
> http://www.franz.com/downloads/
>
> Don't have it to myself anymore. :(
You are that excited over the *trial* version? ;-) Don't you have the
heavy-duty version anyway?
jonathon wrote:
> Kenny Tilton wrote:
>
>>...Franz seems to have upgraded their trial version to ACL7.
>>
>> http://www.franz.com/downloads/
>>
>>Don't have it to myself anymore. :(
>
>
> You are that excited over the *trial* version? ;-)
No, over ACL7 vs 6.2. As good as 6.2 was, a lot of nice touches in 7
will be appreciated by Lisp newbs looking for IDEs like the ones they
have for other languages. And it is a bit hard having 7 but trying to
communicate with folks still on 6.2 in re a couple of issues I had run
into. So having the Trial in synch with the regular product is nice.
Don't you have the
> heavy-duty version anyway?
>
Pro, not Enterprise.
--
Kenny
Why Lisp? http://lisp.tech.coop/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
"I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and I'm happy to state
I finally won out over it."
Elwood P. Dowd, "Harvey", 1950
What ? Even Kenny . author of the great Cells & Cello,
working on multimillion projects,kicking C-type programmers
bats,doesn't have Enterprise edition .
I'm dissappointed , i'm going for beer .
·············@hotmail.com wrote:
> What ? Even Kenny . author of the great Cells & Cello,
...both of which run on any Lisp and any operating system (hint)...
> working on multimillion projects,kicking C-type programmers
> bats,doesn't have Enterprise edition .
...because he just needs a killer IDE during development, and Pro has that.
> I'm dissappointed ,...
...because you did not think things through very well.
i'm going for beer .
>
But I see there is hope for you.
--
Kenny
Why Lisp? http://lisp.tech.coop/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
"I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and I'm happy to state
I finally won out over it."
Elwood P. Dowd, "Harvey", 1950
Kenny Tilton wrote:
> ·············@hotmail.com wrote:
> > What ? Even Kenny . author of the great Cells & Cello,
>
> ...both of which run on any Lisp and any operating system (hint)...
My humble gratitude for above.
>
> > working on multimillion projects,kicking C-type programmers
> > bats,doesn't have Enterprise edition .
>
> ...because he just needs a killer IDE during development, and Pro has that.
>
> > I'm dissappointed ,...
>
> ...because you did not think things through very well.
>
It looks like that i had a wrong picture for Lispers:
Cat : Students , newbs
CLisp , Allegro Trial, LW Personal , Corman
Middle class :
LW Professional , Allegro Pro ,
Elite :
Allegro Enterprise or LW Enterprise with many many incidents support.
It looks like i had a wrong stereotype .
Note i didn't mention SBCL / CMUCL because i work only on Windows.
Yes i'm Borged
> i'm going for beer .
> >
>
> But I see there is hope for you.
>
> --
> Kenny
>
> Why Lisp? http://lisp.tech.coop/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
>
> "I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and I'm happy to state
> I finally won out over it."
> Elwood P. Dowd, "Harey", 1950
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 02:51:46 GMT, Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
> Pro, not Enterprise.
So you never deliver applications to your customers?
--
Lisp is not dead, it just smells funny.
Real email: (replace (subseq ·········@agharta.de" 5) "edi")
On 10 Aug 2005 03:37:51 -0700, ···············@lycos.com wrote:
> As i know Allegro Pro is missing a Runtime what do you use for
> making executables ?
You should ask Kenny, not me.
Cheers,
Edi.
--
Lisp is not dead, it just smells funny.
Real email: (replace (subseq ·········@agharta.de" 5) "edi")
Edi Weitz wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 02:51:46 GMT, Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Pro, not Enterprise.
>
>
> So you never deliver applications to your customers?
>
Think, Edi. Think.
:)
--
Kenny
Why Lisp? http://lisp.tech.coop/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
"I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and I'm happy to state
I finally won out over it."
Elwood P. Dowd, "Harvey", 1950
jonathon wrote:
> Kenny Tilton wrote:
>
>>>So you never deliver applications to your customers?
>>>
>>
>>Think, Edi. Think.
>>
>>:)
>
>
> You *haven't* delivered yet, have you?
>
Nice try. One could defer the cost of EE until it was time to ship and
then upgrade from Pro. But, no, that is not why I have Pro.
Read, jonathon. Read.
--
Kenny
Why Lisp? http://lisp.tech.coop/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
"I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and I'm happy to state
I finally won out over it."
Elwood P. Dowd, "Harvey", 1950
Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> Read, jonathon. Read.
Tossing in a guess: You don't need to deliver /dynamic/� applications?
Footnotes:
� http://www.franz.com/products/distribution_tools/
--
Steven E. Harris
Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> jonathon wrote:
>> Kenny Tilton wrote:
>>
>>>>So you never deliver applications to your customers?
>>>>
>>>
>>>Think, Edi. Think.
>>>
>>>:)
>> You *haven't* delivered yet, have you?
>>
>
> Nice try. One could defer the cost of EE until it was time to ship and
> then upgrade from Pro. But, no, that is not why I have Pro.
>
> Read, jonathon. Read.
I'd note that Kenny had previously said:
>
> ·············@hotmail.com wrote:
> > What ? Even Kenny . author of the great Cells & Cello,
>
> ...both of which run on any Lisp and any operating system (hint)...
>
> > working on multimillion projects,kicking C-type programmers
> > bats,doesn't have Enterprise edition .
>
> ...because he just needs a killer IDE during development, and Pro
> has that.
He's not using ACL for the run-time performance - just the IDE.
In fact, there are probably times when something other than ACL is
preferable (due to OS and/or cost-restraints).
So, I'd conclude he doesn't deliver apps with ACL because -
"...both of which (Cell & Cello) run on any Lisp and any operating
system (hint)..."
i.e. the application runs under an appropriate lisp environment that
meets the needs from a price/performance/liability/licensing point
of view.
--jon
Jon Boone wrote:
> He's not using ACL for the run-time performance - just the IDE.
> In fact, there are probably times when something other than ACL is
> preferable (due to OS and/or cost-restraints).
*Sigh*. If only that killer IDE existed for FreeBSD, or even Linux.
Composer doesn't cut it.
"jonathon" <···········@bigfoot.com> writes:
> Jon Boone wrote:
> > He's not using ACL for the run-time performance - just the IDE.
> > In fact, there are probably times when something other than ACL is
> > preferable (due to OS and/or cost-restraints).
>
> *Sigh*. If only that killer IDE existed for FreeBSD, or even Linux.
> Composer doesn't cut it.
It does (well, in alpha form, currently):
http://www.franz.com/support/tech_corner/linuxide-041505.lhtml
--
Duane Rettig ·····@franz.com Franz Inc. http://www.franz.com/
555 12th St., Suite 1450 http://www.555citycenter.com/
Oakland, Ca. 94607 Phone: (510) 452-2000; Fax: (510) 452-0182
jonathon wrote:
> Jon Boone wrote:
>
>> He's not using ACL for the run-time performance - just the IDE.
>> In fact, there are probably times when something other than ACL is
>> preferable (due to OS and/or cost-restraints).
Right. By eschewing proprietary ACL tools I am free to deliver with
Lispworks or even CLisp, OpenMCL on the Mac.
otoh, if I see something I like and need such as AllegroCache, I will
consider EE and paying whatever Franz wants for runtimes. At that point
it all depends on how the negotiations go. And I will talk with Franz
anyway when it is time to ship and see what kind of deal I can cut.
Might work out if they see I am not a captive audience.
>
>
> *Sigh*. If only that killer IDE existed for FreeBSD, or even Linux.
> Composer doesn't cut it.
>
Oh. I thought the IDE had been ported to Linux. I see I am mistaken.
Boy, I sure hate Bill and his OS, but that win32 IDE is well worth a
deal with the devil.
--
Kenny
Why Lisp? http://lisp.tech.coop/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
"I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and I'm happy to state
I finally won out over it."
Elwood P. Dowd, "Harvey", 1950
Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> > *Sigh*. If only that killer IDE existed for FreeBSD, or even Linux.
> > Composer doesn't cut it.
>
> Oh. I thought the IDE had been ported to Linux. I see I am mistaken.
> Boy, I sure hate Bill and his OS, but that win32 IDE is well worth a
> deal with the devil.
It has been, it works with GTK of some reasonably modern version that
RedHat apparently has something against. Hmm, maybe I should make
another try at compiling GTK again...
--
/|_ .-----------------------.
,' .\ / | Free Mumia Abu-Jamal! |
,--' _,' | Abolish the racist |
/ / | death penalty! |
( -. | `-----------------------'
| ) |
(`-. '--.)
`. )----'
Kenny Tilton wrote:
> jonathon wrote:
> > Jon Boone wrote:
> >
> >> He's not using ACL for the run-time performance - just the IDE.
> >> In fact, there are probably times when something other than ACL is
> >> preferable (due to OS and/or cost-restraints).
>
> Right. By eschewing proprietary ACL tools I am free to deliver with
> Lispworks or even CLisp, OpenMCL on the Mac.
So the debugger, inspector, listener, and GUI designer do their work
without proprietary extensions to the code, right? Are those basically
the reasons you use the IDE?
jonathon wrote:
> Kenny Tilton wrote:
>
>>jonathon wrote:
>>
>>>Jon Boone wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> He's not using ACL for the run-time performance - just the IDE.
>>>> In fact, there are probably times when something other than ACL is
>>>> preferable (due to OS and/or cost-restraints).
>>
>>Right. By eschewing proprietary ACL tools I am free to deliver with
>>Lispworks or even CLisp, OpenMCL on the Mac.
>
>
> So the debugger, inspector, listener, and GUI designer do their work
> without proprietary extensions to the code, right?
Wrong, but then I have no idea what you mean. The only sensible thing in
there is "GUI designer". I do not use that or their Common Graphics GUI
package. As for the rest, I do not /deliver/ their debugger et al. /Of
course/ those do their work with proprietary extensions to the code.
More accurately, they /are/ proprietary.
Did you mean "extensions to /my/ code"? ie, I can debug (print "Hello,
world") without adorning it with ACL-ese to make the debugger work? That
would not be a very helpful debugger.
Are those basically
> the reasons you use the IDE?
>
Again am I stumped. Those things /are/ the IDE. Other Lisps have them,
so they cannot be the reason I use the IDE. The reason I /like/ the IDE
is the quality and integration of those things.
--
Kenny
Why Lisp? http://lisp.tech.coop/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
"I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and I'm happy to state
I finally won out over it."
Elwood P. Dowd, "Harvey", 1950
Kenny Tilton wrote:
> Wrong, but then I have no idea what you mean. The only sensible thing in
> there is "GUI designer". I do not use that or their Common Graphics GUI
> package. As for the rest, I do not /deliver/ their debugger et al. /Of
> course/ those do their work with proprietary extensions to the code.
> More accurately, they /are/ proprietary.
When I think of some IDEs, they use proprietary formats for managing
projects, so it's a pain to start or work on a project with them, and
then go back to other tools.
> Did you mean "extensions to /my/ code"? ie, I can debug (print "Hello,
> world") without adorning it with ACL-ese to make the debugger work? That
> would not be a very helpful debugger.
I agree. I'm still very new to Lisp IDEs, but I know from other
environments that it's no fun when a tool adds proprietary extensions
to your code to make something work the way it wants.
>
> Are those basically
> > the reasons you use the IDE?
> >
>
> Again am I stumped. Those things /are/ the IDE. Other Lisps have them,
> so they cannot be the reason I use the IDE. The reason I /like/ the IDE
> is the quality and integration of those things.
That's what I meant... the IDE, 'those things' ...
My point was just to ascertain /which/ of those components of the IDE
you found so useful, and which of them you do /not/ use or find useful.
That's all.
jonathon wrote:
> Kenny Tilton wrote:
>
>>Wrong, but then I have no idea what you mean. The only sensible thing in
>>there is "GUI designer". I do not use that or their Common Graphics GUI
>>package. As for the rest, I do not /deliver/ their debugger et al. /Of
>>course/ those do their work with proprietary extensions to the code.
>>More accurately, they /are/ proprietary.
>
>
> When I think of some IDEs, they use proprietary formats for managing
> projects, so it's a pain to start or work on a project with them, and
> then go back to other tools.
yeah, there is an hour's aggravation switching to ASDF when I leave ACL
and its project manager. Obviously not enough to make me use ASDF under
ACL, which anyone of course can do.
>
>
>>Did you mean "extensions to /my/ code"? ie, I can debug (print "Hello,
>>world") without adorning it with ACL-ese to make the debugger work? That
>>would not be a very helpful debugger.
>
>
> I agree. I'm still very new to Lisp IDEs, but I know from other
> environments that it's no fun when a tool adds proprietary extensions
> to your code to make something work the way it wants.
Adds extensions to my code? Who (language? compiler?) does that?
>
>
>> Are those basically
>>
>>>the reasons you use the IDE?
>>>
>>
>>Again am I stumped. Those things /are/ the IDE. Other Lisps have them,
>>so they cannot be the reason I use the IDE. The reason I /like/ the IDE
>>is the quality and integration of those things.
>
>
> That's what I meant... the IDE, 'those things' ...
>
> My point was just to ascertain /which/ of those components of the IDE
> you found so useful, and which of them you do /not/ use or find useful.
> That's all.
>
I think the only thing I do not use is the class browser. Not sure why.
Not much time for the Listener, either. Other than that, I cruise around
from editor to debugger to inspector to search to apropos to "find
definitions" to the project window to the CLHS pretty much without
thinking about anything other than my code. Each tool is terrific, and
the integration is outasight.
--
Kenny
Why Lisp? http://lisp.tech.coop/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
"I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and I'm happy to state
I finally won out over it."
Elwood P. Dowd, "Harvey", 1950
Kenny Tilton wrote:
> >>there is "GUI designer". I do not use that or their Common Graphics GUI
> >>package. As for the rest, I do not /deliver/ their debugger et al. /Of
You use Cells and... CLIM, is it? Or what GUI toolkit do you use?
> yeah, there is an hour's aggravation switching to ASDF when I leave ACL
> and its project manager. Obviously not enough to make me use ASDF under
> ACL, which anyone of course can do.
I haven't started exploring the project layout yet.
> Adds extensions to my code? Who (language? compiler?) does that?
If you are being sarcastic, you've seen the VC++ tools. If not, stay
away from them. :-) VC++ writes code for you that doesn't even always
run, then you spend hours hunting down bugs neither you nor any of your
coworkers wrote.
> I think the only thing I do not use is the class browser. Not sure why.
> Not much time for the Listener, either. Other than that, I cruise around
> from editor to debugger to inspector to search to apropos to "find
> definitions" to the project window to the CLHS pretty much without
> thinking about anything other than my code. Each tool is terrific, and
> the integration is outasight.
I installed 7.0 trial today and did the GUI tutorial. I love it! It's
amazing how compact the code is, and how productive the IDE is. And I
guess if you stay away from the GUI you can target other Lisps as well,
right?
One question: how much good is the inspector for classes that aren't
generated by the GUI? Since you don't use Common Graphics, doesn't
that limit its use in your application?
jonathon wrote:
> Kenny Tilton wrote:
>
>>>>there is "GUI designer". I do not use that or their Common Graphics GUI
>>>>package. As for the rest, I do not /deliver/ their debugger et al. /Of
>
>
> You use Cells and... CLIM, is it? Or what GUI toolkit do you use?
Me? My own OpenGL-based GUI. One can also use Cells-GTk, contributed by
Vasilis M. (refusing to guess at the rest of the spelling. <g>)
>
>
>>yeah, there is an hour's aggravation switching to ASDF when I leave ACL
>>and its project manager. Obviously not enough to make me use ASDF under
>>ACL, which anyone of course can do.
>
>
> I haven't started exploring the project layout yet.
That would be the Project Manager, fwiw.
>
>
>>Adds extensions to my code? Who (language? compiler?) does that?
>
>
> If you are being sarcastic, you've seen the VC++ tools. If not, stay
> away from them. :-) VC++ writes code for you that doesn't even always
> run, then you spend hours hunting down bugs neither you nor any of your
> coworkers wrote.
Intriguing.
>
>
>>I think the only thing I do not use is the class browser. Not sure why.
>>Not much time for the Listener, either. Other than that, I cruise around
>>from editor to debugger to inspector to search to apropos to "find
>>definitions" to the project window to the CLHS pretty much without
>>thinking about anything other than my code. Each tool is terrific, and
>>the integration is outasight.
>
>
> I installed 7.0 trial today and did the GUI tutorial. I love it! It's
> amazing how compact the code is, and how productive the IDE is. And I
> guess if you stay away from the GUI you can target other Lisps as well,
> right?
Exactimundo. If you are just using the common-lisp package (roughly
equivalent to a library), ports to other compliant Common Lisps are no
more painful than ports between C compilers.
>
> One question: how much good is the inspector for classes that aren't
> generated by the GUI?
I fuzzily recall the ACL GUI builder involving hacking via the
inspector, but this is another question I find hard to parse. I think
Franz just decided the Inspector was a good way to let people customize
interfaces generated from the builder. But the Inspector otherwise is
just a tool for dynamically viewing Lisp objects. I mean, you can
(inspect 42) if you want. Something like DEFUN will expand into
compile-time code that helps other IDE tools do their jobs, but the GUI
builder itself generates DEFCLASS and other such forms so in the end one
gets the benefit of the added value coming from DEFCLASS, DEFUN, etc.
Since you don't use Common Graphics, doesn't
> that limit its use in your application?
>
Stumped again I am. Yes, not using it limits its use. Extremely so. :)
Now forget Lisp and learn to write English!
--
Kenny
Why Lisp? http://lisp.tech.coop/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
"I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and I'm happy to state
I finally won out over it."
Elwood P. Dowd, "Harvey", 1950
Kenny Tilton wrote:
> Me? My own OpenGL-based GUI. One can also use Cells-GTk, contributed by
> Vasilis M. (refusing to guess at the rest of the spelling. <g>)
You actually used OpenGL and raw event handling to build your own GUI
from the ground up? You rolled your own buttons, combo boxes, lists,
and all that?
> > I haven't started exploring the project layout yet.
>
> That would be the Project Manager, fwiw.
By project layout, I meant the files and such used to define the build.
The framework for ACL that would compare to ASDF. Not the tool that
manages it.
> Since you don't use Common Graphics, doesn't
> > that limit its use in your application?
> >
>
> Stumped again I am. Yes, not using it limits its use. Extremely so. :)
> Now forget Lisp and learn to write English!
Restating: Since you don't use Common Graphics, doesn't that limit the
Inspector's use in your application?
But you answered that by saying any Lisp object can be inspected.
jonathon wrote:
> Kenny Tilton wrote:
>
>>Me? My own OpenGL-based GUI. One can also use Cells-GTk, contributed by
>>Vasilis M. (refusing to guess at the rest of the spelling. <g>)
>
>
> You actually used OpenGL and raw event handling to build your own GUI
> from the ground up? You rolled your own buttons, combo boxes, lists,
> and all that?
Yep. The GLUT provides portable basic window creation and events.
>
>
>>>I haven't started exploring the project layout yet.
>>
>>That would be the Project Manager, fwiw.
>
>
> By project layout, I meant the files and such used to define the build.
> The framework for ACL that would compare to ASDF. Not the tool that
> manages it.
One and the same. The Project Manager /does/ maintain a single
defsystem-like source file as one interactively shapes ones projects,
but that is just because the Franz developers are smart enough to use a
sexpr to encode the the data that defines the build.
>
>
>> Since you don't use Common Graphics, doesn't
>>
>>>that limit its use in your application?
>>>
>>
>>Stumped again I am. Yes, not using it limits its use. Extremely so. :)
>>Now forget Lisp and learn to write English!
>
>
> Restating: Since you don't use Common Graphics, doesn't that limit the
> Inspector's use in your application?
Try this: the ACL Inspector (probably) uses CG. To inspect any Lisp
object I give it, from 42 to my own CLOS classes. This is during
development. This does not mean the Inspector is being used in my
application, it means it is being used on my application. During
development. By me, not my application. There are no (inspect ...) forms
in my application, except on occasion as a temporary debugging hack.
Come to think of it, if I put one in today I would probably have to
code: (inspector::inspect 42). That would work during development
because the IDE loads the inspector package. But if I cut an executable
and tried to leave out the inspector package, I would indeed get an
error. But then I would take out the inspect form which would have been
left in place by mistake.
>
> But you answered that by saying any Lisp object can be inspected.
>
Yes. (inspect 42) works even though 42 was not developed using Common
Graphics.
--
Kenny
Why Lisp? http://lisp.tech.coop/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
"I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and I'm happy to state
I finally won out over it."
Elwood P. Dowd, "Harvey", 1950
On 2005-08-13 03:55:29, Kenny Tilton wrote:
> Now forget Lisp and learn to write English!
What is it with the Lisp users and the language chauvinism regarding
their native language English?
Stefan Scholl wrote:
> On 2005-08-13 03:55:29, Kenny Tilton wrote:
>
>>Now forget Lisp and learn to write English!
>
>
> What is it with the Lisp users and the language chauvinism regarding
> their native language English?
That should be "What is it with Lisp users....".
I think precisely because you are a non-native speaker you (a) do not
realize Jonathan /is/ a native English speaker and (b) placed the
emphasis on "English", whereas the emphasis was on "writing".
Now be careful getting down off your high horse.
ps. Where the hell do you see Lisp users harrassing non-native speakers?
--
Kenny
Why Lisp? http://lisp.tech.coop/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
"I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and I'm happy to state
I finally won out over it."
Elwood P. Dowd, "Harvey", 1950
On 12 Aug 2005 15:12:55 -0700, "jonathon" <···········@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
>If you are being sarcastic, you've seen the VC++ tools. If not, stay
>away from them. :-) VC++ writes code for you that doesn't even always
>run, then you spend hours hunting down bugs neither you nor any of your
>coworkers wrote.
I've used five versions of VC since 1993 and I've never seen a wizard
generate buggy code. But the wizards rely on information from other
sources - most notably the ID defines in the resource.h file which can
be corrupted by heavy use of the visual editor ... which absolutely
*does* have bugs.
The resource defines are the first place to look if you suspect your
problem is in the framework. What usually happens is that several
resources end up having the same ID. Resource objects are tracked
using a unique hash table - if two or more objects were created with
the same ID, the table will return the most recently created object
and the framework code won't know the difference.
The fix is to renumber all the resource defines and recompile. And
get into the habit of inspecting the resource.h file periodically
because it will likely be f_cked up long before you notice a problem.
George
--
for email reply remove "/" from address
George Neuner wrote:
> On 12 Aug 2005 15:12:55 -0700, "jonathon" <···········@bigfoot.com>
> wrote:
> I've used five versions of VC since 1993 and I've never seen a wizard
> generate buggy code. But the wizards rely on information from other
> sources - most notably the ID defines in the resource.h file which can
> be corrupted by heavy use of the visual editor ... which absolutely
> *does* have bugs.
I can't remember whether it's for Connection Points or adding new
interfaces, but one of them forgets a letter in a class name, and
breaks the compile. I even have a book that tells you it's a bug, and
just to add a 'D' manually after you use the wizard.
You'd think they'd fix it in a service pack.
On 15 Aug 2005 05:03:27 -0700, "jonathon" <···········@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
>
>George Neuner wrote:
>> On 12 Aug 2005 15:12:55 -0700, "jonathon" <···········@bigfoot.com>
>> wrote:
>> I've used five versions of VC since 1993 and I've never seen a wizard
>> generate buggy code. But the wizards rely on information from other
>> sources - most notably the ID defines in the resource.h file which can
>> be corrupted by heavy use of the visual editor ... which absolutely
>> *does* have bugs.
>
>I can't remember whether it's for Connection Points or adding new
>interfaces, but one of them forgets a letter in a class name, and
>breaks the compile. I even have a book that tells you it's a bug, and
>just to add a 'D' manually after you use the wizard.
>
>You'd think they'd fix it in a service pack.
I haven't run into that one, but I don't use ATL much ... when I do
need to create a component I tend to write it from scratch.
What is the 'D' actually for? Is it the same debug vs release library
linking problem that's plagued VS for ages?
George
--
for email reply remove "/" from address
George Neuner wrote:
> >I can't remember whether it's for Connection Points or adding new
> >interfaces, but one of them forgets a letter in a class name, and
> >breaks the compile. I even have a book that tells you it's a bug, and
> >just to add a 'D' manually after you use the wizard.
> >
> >You'd think they'd fix it in a service pack.
>
> I haven't run into that one, but I don't use ATL much ... when I do
> need to create a component I tend to write it from scratch.
>
> What is the 'D' actually for? Is it the same debug vs release library
> linking problem that's plagued VS for ages?
If you use the 'Implement Connection Point' Wizard, the macro entry
created is missing a 'D' in the GUI.
Kenny Tilton wrote:
>
>
> jonathon wrote:
>
>> Jon Boone wrote:
>>
>>> He's not using ACL for the run-time performance - just the IDE.
>>> In fact, there are probably times when something other than ACL is
>>> preferable (due to OS and/or cost-restraints).
>
>
> Right. By eschewing proprietary ACL tools ...
sorry for the non sequitor. performance is not an issue for me.
--
Kenny
Why Lisp? http://lisp.tech.coop/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
"I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and I'm happy to state
I finally won out over it."
Elwood P. Dowd, "Harvey", 1950
Kenny Tilton schrieb:
> Boy, I sure hate Bill and his OS, but that win32 IDE is well worth a
> deal with the devil.
btw:
Queen Elisabeth II did it. Bill becomes now
Knight Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire
(in short: KBE) (he is too joung for "Sir")
Congratulations.
stefan
lin8080 <·······@freenet.de> wrote:
>Queen Elisabeth II did it. Bill becomes now
>Knight Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire
>(in short: KBE) (he is too joung for "Sir")
Foremost, I'd say, he is too American for "Sir".
mkb.
Kenny Tilton schrieb:
>
>
> jonathon wrote:
>
>> Kenny Tilton wrote:
>>
>>>> So you never deliver applications to your customers?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Think, Edi. Think.
>>>
>>> :)
>>
>>
>>
>> You *haven't* delivered yet, have you?
>>
>
> Nice try. One could defer the cost of EE until it was time to ship and
> then upgrade from Pro. But, no, that is not why I have Pro.
>
> Read, jonathon. Read.
>
So, why do you have the Pro-Version and not EE?
Answer, Kenny. Answer.
Andr�
--
>>>>> "Kenny" == Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
Kenny> ...Franz seems to have upgraded their trial version to ACL7.
Kenny> http://www.franz.com/downloads/
Kenny> Don't have it to myself anymore. :(
Kenny> [To the irony-challenged: if you are on Windows or Linux, run do
Kenny> not walk to the above URL.]
Unfortunately, it seems that the trial version cannot even compile
cl-ppcre because of the heap size limitation. Personally, I don't find
that very useful.
--J.
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 10:23:41 +0200, Jan Rychter <···@rychter.com> wrote:
> Unfortunately, it seems that the trial version cannot even compile
> cl-ppcre because of the heap size limitation. Personally, I don't
> find that very useful.
<http://weitz.de/cl-ppcre/#allegro>
Cheers,
Edi.
--
Lisp is not dead, it just smells funny.
Real email: (replace (subseq ·········@agharta.de" 5) "edi")