On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 1:49 AM, Dr. David Kirkby<david.kir...@onetel.net> wrote: > > Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 9:28 AM, Dr. David Kirkby<david.kir...@onetel.net> >> wrote: >>> I believe he still has some issues on Solaris Intel using gcc 4.4.1. >>> That version of gcc was only released on 22nd July 2009 (< 2 weeks ago). >> >> Seems 4.4.1 is doing fine after I reverted some changes from MPIR back >> into GMP. The tests are also running fine and should pop up in >> http://ecls.sourceforge.net/logs.html in a couple of hours. > > Great > >>> The .spkg, which I've called a '.p0' is really more than a patch, as its >>> a complete checkout of the CVS. It has things we have no use for in >>> Sage (the .spkg is over twice the size of the original one). So I am NOT >>> proposing this particular .spkg goes into Sage. >> >> As I told David, there will be a new release, probably before the >> beginning of next week. You can use that in the spkg instead of the >> unstable sources. I would like, though, that some developers of Sage >> keep a copy of the unstable tree so that I can quickly answer back >> with fixes to the problems you may find, giving me back your feedback >> on those builds. > > I'll wait until then before making any attempt to get a new version of > ecl into Sage. > > >>> For whatever reason, Maximum and this ecl don't get on too well as >>> friends!! The obvious thing for me to do is to run the ecl test suite. >>> But this is certainly progress. >>> [...] >>> /export/home/drkirkby/sage/sage-4.1.1.rc0/spkg/build/maxima-5.16.3.p2/src/src/db.lisp, >>> position 5563, and form >>> ;;; (FSET 'QUEUE+P #'(LAMBDA-BLOCK QUEUE+P # ...)) >>> ;;; In the argument 1 of a call to CAR, the type of the form (LOGIOR >>> LAB-HIGH-BIT (UNLAB LAB)) is INTEGER, not LIST. >> >> Ooops, ECL now implements a better type propagator, which has detected >> an error in the following function >> >> (defun queue+p (nd lab) >> (cond ((null (setq *db* (+labs nd))) >> [...] (t >> (iorm *db* (logior +lab-high-bit+ (unlab lab)))))) >> >> Based on this definition >> >> (defmacro iorm (cell n) >> `(rplaca ,cell (logior (car ,cell) (car ,n)))) >> >> the second argument to (IORM *db* ...) should be a cons, not an integer. >> >> Juanjo >> > > Given your comments about the fact there is a bug in Maxima, then adding > the revised ecl into Sage would probably caused objections, as Maxima is > in the core part of Sage. I hope I can get a patch to Maxima quickly. > > I am happy to keep a CVS snapshot of ecl. I'm not really using ecl > myself though (I don't know lisp). It is just part of the build process > which is needed for Maxima, and possibly other parts of Sage, though I > am not sure about that.
Lisp is only used for Maxima. > > I'm happy to run your test suite on another SPARC machine. This is my > own personal one. It will in a few hours have gcc 4.4.1 on it - I'm in > the process of building it. > > I believe it is fair to say William is not overly keen on having Maxima > in Sage anyway, but in the short term, it needs to be there. > I'm not overly keen on it, but the simple fact is that Maxima will be in Sage for a long long time to come. William --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
