Well that was easy. In that case all four supported lisps should
generate interoperable serializations at this time on the same
machine architecture (little endian and big endian will not be
compatible, but 32 and 64-bit should be. I will not test this
feature during this release, but if
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 09:54:17 -0400, Ian Eslick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The docs are actually not clear on this and I haven't had time to do
> an experiment, but they seemed to indicate that while wide words are
> supported internally and that external IO could have an external
> format of uni
The docs are actually not clear on this and I haven't had time to do
an experiment, but they seemed to indicate that while wide words are
supported internally and that external IO could have an external
format of unicode as well as many others. There was no indication
which external format
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 08:45:36 -0400, Ian Eslick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't think that Lispworks returns proper unicode codes.
Why not?
___
elephant-devel site list
elephant-devel@common-lisp.net
http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/elephant-
One interesting result from the recent serializer rewrites is that I
was able to open a database in SBCL that was created in Allegro and
read back in strings, symbols, numbers, regular and persistent classes.
I think that SBCL, Allegro, OpenMCL and Lispworks will have
compatible databases f
