Make sure you look at the log and see how many hits your getting. I am pretty sure that if you try to do any heavy developing it will puke at least every couple of days. Could be an ACL501 thing I guess. (or worse: a windows thing) [it was puking every couple of days on sun too, I believe]
"R. Matthew Emerson" wrote: > "Andrew K. Wolven" <awol...@redfernlane.org> writes:
> > > ACL running CL-HTTP is serving www.alu.org, and it's been running > > > continuously since january 8th. (but nothing very complicated is > > > going on).
> > > -matt
> > Please send me your latest patches.
> vanilla cl-http 70-23 includes the fixes.
> also, before you start cl-http: > (setf http:*resolve-ip-addresses* nil) > (setf acl-socket:*print-hostnames-in-stream* nil)
> this prevents CL-HTTP from doing a reverse lookup when it tries to put > the hostname of the connecting system into the process name string.
> previous versions didn't pay attention to http:*resolve-ip-addresses* > and had a buggy wait function which would cause processes to get > arrested and stack up.
"Andrew K. Wolven" wrote: > Mallery isn't doing anything for the benefit of the Lisp Community itself, > and > is only alienating supporters if he thinks I am going to make any customer > cough up more than two hundred bucks for CL-HTTP when Apache is free.
If $200 is big money for a web server for your customers, then I don't envy you, but supposedly your talent can add a lot of value to it (embed the web server in an application, for example), and help you make decent money. Or is it that you can't get the clients to pay for anything?
As for the CL-HTTP license, I think that a meaningful commercial license (maybe along with an alternative, unsupported OS license) would be preferable, but I don't think it would make a difference for you, as you are clearly out of your medication.
Rainer Joswig wrote: > In article <3921DD20.A968D...@redfernlane.org>, "Andrew K. Wolven" > <awol...@redfernlane.org> wrote:
> > To compare anything to they way it works on Genera is cheating.
> I was talking about MCL and LW also, wasn't I?
> > No there is no freaking defsystem to load CL-HTTP on Franz.
> On every platform where possible CL-HTTP uses the native > defsystem. Ask Franz for support, since they are maintaining > the port to the latest ACL version.
> Xanalys is maintaining the LispWorks port. It works there. > Digitool is maintaining parts of the MCL port it works > there, too. It should not be to complicated.
> > CL-HTTP promptly crashes ACL within 24 hours.
> Ask Franz, they are maintaining the port.
> > using one command, It also loads a lot of stuff you don't need. > > (Therefore you > > must write your own build-cl-http command)
> Ask Franz.
> > wants to have bad blood with Franz, then I am sorry, because I am going > > to side > > with Franz.
Rainer Joswig wrote: > In article <3921EF1F.638B0...@redfernlane.org>, "Andrew K. Wolven" > <awol...@redfernlane.org> wrote:
> > Lisp is in a sad, sad state. Even though everybody in the lisp community > > knows that this is technology for the worlds salvation, no one will > > cooperate. Its all about the cash.
> Maybe when browsing your CL-HTTP documentation you see that > a lot of people have and are collaborating to make it > work. There are various contributed subsystems (from > HTML to XML parsing) and several ports have been done > by users. I personally are very thankful to these people. > Many man years have been gone into it.
It referring to JCMA's pocket?
Background info: I am just now getting up to speed with application development. I am not ashamed of this.
What this means is that if I contributed CL-HTTP, I still could not justify the cost of the commercial license to my customer, because they expect Dreamweaver and Apache. You can chant Lisp all day and the customer doesn't know that you are not using Perl CGI for their site. You can't enter competition in an open source market with a price in the thousands of dollars! Thats ridiculous! Allegroserve is LGPL! I am pretty sure that means I can port it to CMUCL if I wish. Thats competative with Apache. I don't need ultra high performance streams, because I am doing sites for Joe Schmo not the prestigious Whitehouse. Excuse the hell out of me for being confused into thinking that I could actually contribute to the CL-HTTP project and still be able to afford to run my contribution! I understand that you guys are Mallery's friends but please get a clue.
In article <3921C3B3.DCBA2...@redfernlane.org>, "Andrew K. Wolven"
<awol...@redfernlane.org> wrote: > Basically people got fed up and found other solutions.
Seems that *some* people are developing CL-HTTP based applications. Others are copying some of its concepts.
> (The people > at Franz apparently felt it is just as easy to write a server, rather > than working > the bugs out of CL-HTTP.)
I know about who this says something...
> The distribution is also starting to get unwieldy due to size and lack of > defsystem.
I just compiled/loaded the latest CL-HTTP devo on my Powerbook G3 by loading one file, started the server with one menu item invocation and got the top server web page in Netscape with another menu item invocation. Total time: less than one minute. Doesn't sound too complicated to me.
> (there is a defsystem but it is not actually used for the > distribution)
CL-HTTP doesn't use a defsystem???
Try "Show System Definition CL-HTTP" on Genera. How do you think patches are being maintained? I'm also just doing "Restore Distribution" over the net to keep my local sources current.
Load CL-HTTP into MCL and look at the CL-HTTP menu under "Edit CL-HTTP System", "Compile CL-HTTP System", "Load CL-HTTP System" and "Recompile CL-HTTP system".
In LispWorks browse your systems using the usual facilities after loading CL-HTTP. What do you see?
"Andrew K. Wolven" <awol...@redfernlane.org> writes:
> > ACL running CL-HTTP is serving www.alu.org, and it's been running > > continuously since january 8th. (but nothing very complicated is > > going on).
> > -matt
> Please send me your latest patches.
vanilla cl-http 70-23 includes the fixes.
also, before you start cl-http: (setf http:*resolve-ip-addresses* nil) (setf acl-socket:*print-hostnames-in-stream* nil)
this prevents CL-HTTP from doing a reverse lookup when it tries to put the hostname of the connecting system into the process name string.
previous versions didn't pay attention to http:*resolve-ip-addresses* and had a buggy wait function which would cause processes to get arrested and stack up.
In article <3921DD20.A968D...@redfernlane.org>, "Andrew K. Wolven"
<awol...@redfernlane.org> wrote: > To compare anything to they way it works on Genera is cheating.
I was talking about MCL and LW also, wasn't I?
> No there is no freaking defsystem to load CL-HTTP on Franz.
On every platform where possible CL-HTTP uses the native defsystem. Ask Franz for support, since they are maintaining the port to the latest ACL version.
Xanalys is maintaining the LispWorks port. It works there. Digitool is maintaining parts of the MCL port it works there, too. It should not be to complicated.
> CL-HTTP promptly crashes ACL within 24 hours.
Ask Franz, they are maintaining the port.
> using one command, It also loads a lot of stuff you don't need. > (Therefore you > must write your own build-cl-http command)
Ask Franz.
> wants to have bad blood with Franz, then I am sorry, because I am going > to side > with Franz.
In article <3921EF1F.638B0...@redfernlane.org>, "Andrew K. Wolven"
<awol...@redfernlane.org> wrote: > Lisp is in a sad, sad state. Even though everybody in the lisp community > knows that this is technology for the worlds salvation, no one will > cooperate. Its all about the cash.
Maybe when browsing your CL-HTTP documentation you see that a lot of people have and are collaborating to make it work. There are various contributed subsystems (from HTML to XML parsing) and several ports have been done by users. I personally are very thankful to these people. Many man years have been gone into it.
In article <3921DEE3.AD1EB...@redfernlane.org>, "Andrew K. Wolven"
<awol...@redfernlane.org> wrote: > It should also be noted that large chunks of code live only in the > platform > dependent directories and is about as organized as a plate of spaghetti.
Platform maintainers can reduce the amount of code duplication - just see how little changes are necessary for the LispWorks port. Read "http:lw;server;sysdcl.lisp" for the system declarations for the LispWorks port.
Andrew K. Wolven wrote in message <392211D4.BD2CF...@redfernlane.org>... >What this means is that if I contributed CL-HTTP, I still could not justify the >cost of the commercial license to my customer, because they expect Dreamweaver >and Apache. >You can chant Lisp all day and the customer doesn't know that you are not using >Perl CGI for their site. >You can't enter competition in an open source market with a price in the >thousands of dollars! >Thats ridiculous! Allegroserve is LGPL! >I am pretty sure that means I can port it to CMUCL if I wish. Thats >competative with Apache. >I don't need ultra high performance streams, because I am doing sites for Joe >Schmo not the prestigious Whitehouse. >Excuse the hell out of me for being confused into thinking that I could >actually contribute to the CL-HTTP project and still be able to afford to run >my contribution! >I understand that you guys are Mallery's friends but please get a clue.
Preface: This isn't a defense of CL-HTTP, nor an attack of any kind on Franz. This is simple a reality check for Andrew.
The Allegroserve may perhaps be an LGPL software package, but I can assure that the ACL core that it relies upon is most certainly not. You can not use the "free" ACL version for anything beyond simple development. To use it for anything realistic, anything "commercial", means you need to license ACL from Franz.
And Franz will want a large amount of money to serve up a commercial web application. You cannot simply buy a copy and throw it on to your servers (unless they've changed their terms recently, mind you). In the commercial world, their prices are NOT unreasonable for Internet servers today, but they are pretty darn high to Human Beings. (The dark side of their prices isn't that they're high, it's that they're competitive!)
If the Allegroserve happens to work on other Lisps that may have cheaper prices, then so be it. However, I'm sure that Franz's focus is in enhancing their product to make it more enticing to a wider range of people, and the server infrastructure is a critical piece. Most servers have a very similar core, and by making that core robust and extensible, Franz adds value for customers who wish to focus on the application rather than the plumbing.
If Allegroserve is the start of that sort of foundation, then more power to them. By working on Allegroserve, Franz gets to work on both sides of the server equation. The application side of interfaces, APIs and services as well as the "OS" side of the core Lisp image that can be tweaked by Franz to better support these kinds of servers. Since a lot of server functionality is in the gray nether regiions not specified in the ANSI standard, Franz will probably show little restraint in extending their system to meet these kinds of needs.
I read the license agreement with CL-HTTP, and I didn't see any mention of $200 anywhere. Seems similar to the muddled license of the past that many users seem to have issue with.
What's interesting is that probably the worst news to hit something like Allegroserve and Franz (along with most any other commercial Internet App server) is Apples recent announcement dropping their WebObjects "unlimited" deployment version from $50,000 down to $700. In the market, $50,000 was a competitive (if a bit high) number. Many app server vendors are probably a bit grumpy right now. WebObjects and Franz would probably hit completely different markets, but regardless, folks are going to ask "How come theirs is $700 for development and/or unlimited runtime...and yours isn't?".
Will Hartung wrote: > Andrew K. Wolven wrote in message <392211D4.BD2CF...@redfernlane.org>... > >What this means is that if I contributed CL-HTTP, I still could not justify > the > >cost of the commercial license to my customer, because they expect > Dreamweaver > >and Apache. > >You can chant Lisp all day and the customer doesn't know that you are not > using > >Perl CGI for their site. > >You can't enter competition in an open source market with a price in the > >thousands of dollars! > >Thats ridiculous! Allegroserve is LGPL! > >I am pretty sure that means I can port it to CMUCL if I wish. Thats > >competative with Apache. > >I don't need ultra high performance streams, because I am doing sites for > Joe > >Schmo not the prestigious Whitehouse. > >Excuse the hell out of me for being confused into thinking that I could > >actually contribute to the CL-HTTP project and still be able to afford to > run > >my contribution! > >I understand that you guys are Mallery's friends but please get a clue.
> Preface: This isn't a defense of CL-HTTP, nor an attack of any kind on > Franz. This is simple a reality check for Andrew.
> The Allegroserve may perhaps be an LGPL software package, but I can assure > that the ACL core that it relies upon is most certainly not. You can not use > the "free" ACL version for anything beyond simple development. To use it for > anything realistic, anything "commercial", means you need to license ACL > from Franz.
Complete bullshit. I am just going to do it. Franz gets their cash by legitimate means. They made me pay for an ACL license, and now I am looking at the source code to a tiny fast web server (minus uri.cl). I wouldn't be suprised If I could get this working under CLISP [without threads].
> And Franz will want a large amount of money to serve up a commercial web > application. You cannot simply buy a copy and throw it on to your servers > (unless they've changed their terms recently, mind you). In the commercial > world, their prices are NOT unreasonable for Internet servers today, but > they are pretty darn high to Human Beings. (The dark side of their prices > isn't that they're high, it's that they're competitive!)
I am looking at an email from my Franz salesperson [VAR, runtimes, etc.], and it seems more reasonable than the rumors I get about CL-HTTP. But that is only if I choose to use ACL instead of CMUCL or Open Genera for deployment.
> If the Allegroserve happens to work on other Lisps that may have cheaper > prices, then so be it. However, I'm sure that Franz's focus is in enhancing > their product to make it more enticing to a wider range of people, and the > server infrastructure is a critical piece. Most servers have a very similar > core, and by making that core robust and extensible, Franz adds value for > customers who wish to focus on the application rather than the plumbing.
> If Allegroserve is the start of that sort of foundation, then more power to > them. By working on Allegroserve, Franz gets to work on both sides of the > server equation. The application side of interfaces, APIs and services as > well as the "OS" side of the core Lisp image that can be tweaked by Franz to > better support these kinds of servers. Since a lot of server functionality > is in the gray nether regiions not specified in the ANSI standard, Franz > will probably show little restraint in extending their system to meet these > kinds of needs.
Franz damn well knows that I am going to be knocking at their door as soon as I get a customer flow. We have maybe two more things to nail down in GWL before we are going after the Lotus Notes market.
> I read the license agreement with CL-HTTP, and I didn't see any mention of > $200 anywhere. Seems similar to the muddled license of the past that many > users seem to have issue with.
> What's interesting is that probably the worst news to hit something like > Allegroserve and Franz (along with most any other commercial Internet App > server) is Apples recent announcement dropping their WebObjects "unlimited" > deployment version from $50,000 down to $700. In the market, $50,000 was a > competitive (if a bit high) number. Many app server vendors are probably a > bit grumpy right now. WebObjects and Franz would probably hit completely > different markets, but regardless, folks are going to ask "How come theirs > is $700 for development and/or unlimited runtime...and yours isn't?".
What do you mean?? GWL is open source. CMUCL will see it for the misers.
They don't call it domino for nothin, and were going to knock it over.
> > Andrew K. Wolven wrote in message <392211D4.BD2CF...@redfernlane.org>... > > >What this means is that if I contributed CL-HTTP, I still could not justify > > the > > >cost of the commercial license to my customer, because they expect > > Dreamweaver > > >and Apache. > > >You can chant Lisp all day and the customer doesn't know that you are not > > using > > >Perl CGI for their site. > > >You can't enter competition in an open source market with a price in the > > >thousands of dollars! > > >Thats ridiculous! Allegroserve is LGPL! > > >I am pretty sure that means I can port it to CMUCL if I wish. Thats > > >competative with Apache. > > >I don't need ultra high performance streams, because I am doing sites for > > Joe > > >Schmo not the prestigious Whitehouse. > > >Excuse the hell out of me for being confused into thinking that I could > > >actually contribute to the CL-HTTP project and still be able to afford to > > run > > >my contribution! > > >I understand that you guys are Mallery's friends but please get a clue.
> > Preface: This isn't a defense of CL-HTTP, nor an attack of any kind on > > Franz. This is simple a reality check for Andrew.
> > The Allegroserve may perhaps be an LGPL software package, but I can assure > > that the ACL core that it relies upon is most certainly not. You can not use > > the "free" ACL version for anything beyond simple development. To use it for > > anything realistic, anything "commercial", means you need to license ACL > > from Franz.
> Complete bullshit. I am just going to do it. [CMUCL] > Franz gets their cash by legitimate means. They made me pay for an ACL license, > and now I am looking at the source code to a tiny fast web server (minus > uri.cl). I wouldn't be suprised If I could get this working under CLISP > [without threads].
> > And Franz will want a large amount of money to serve up a commercial web > > application. You cannot simply buy a copy and throw it on to your servers > > (unless they've changed their terms recently, mind you). In the commercial > > world, their prices are NOT unreasonable for Internet servers today, but > > they are pretty darn high to Human Beings. (The dark side of their prices > > isn't that they're high, it's that they're competitive!)
> I am looking at an email from my Franz salesperson [VAR, runtimes, etc.], and it > seems more reasonable than the rumors I get about CL-HTTP. But that is only if > I choose to use ACL instead of CMUCL or Open Genera for deployment.
> > If the Allegroserve happens to work on other Lisps that may have cheaper > > prices, then so be it. However, I'm sure that Franz's focus is in enhancing > > their product to make it more enticing to a wider range of people, and the > > server infrastructure is a critical piece. Most servers have a very similar > > core, and by making that core robust and extensible, Franz adds value for > > customers who wish to focus on the application rather than the plumbing.
> > If Allegroserve is the start of that sort of foundation, then more power to > > them. By working on Allegroserve, Franz gets to work on both sides of the > > server equation. The application side of interfaces, APIs and services as > > well as the "OS" side of the core Lisp image that can be tweaked by Franz to > > better support these kinds of servers. Since a lot of server functionality > > is in the gray nether regiions not specified in the ANSI standard, Franz > > will probably show little restraint in extending their system to meet these > > kinds of needs.
> Franz damn well knows that I am going to be knocking at their door as soon as I > get a customer flow. We have maybe two more things to nail down in GWL before > we are going after the Lotus Notes market.
In case you want to know about GWL:
Those two things two nail down are: Persistence methodology atop an RDMS, and Use of templates for drag and drop interface building. (may just ignore and let someone else do)
Of course we are going to have to always perfect: url->lisp translation (well under control) GC and session management (dependent upon server load)
and add: online source code editing tools (likely to be java enhanced) (just in case you don't have emacs)
I think we will be able to iron out this stuff in six months or less, and will very likely be entirely free except for ACL. We are making it a point ot not be too ACL dependent. Or server dependent (we plan on supporting CL-HTTP).
Thanks to Franz we have a lot more options to present to out potential customers.
We're going to be recommending things like Allegroserve for Franz and CL-HTTP for Mac. (reasonable??)
We still need to be able to have a CL solution to Apache however: LGPL Allegroserve or custom.
There never would have been an Allegroserve if CL-HTTP hadn't been so aloof.
> > I read the license agreement with CL-HTTP, and I didn't see any mention of > > $200 anywhere. Seems similar to the muddled license of the past that many > > users seem to have issue with.
> > What's interesting is that probably the worst news to hit something like > > Allegroserve and Franz (along with most any other commercial Internet App > > server) is Apples recent announcement dropping their WebObjects "unlimited" > > deployment version from $50,000 down to $700. In the market, $50,000 was a > > competitive (if a bit high) number. Many app server vendors are probably a > > bit grumpy right now. WebObjects and Franz would probably hit completely > > different markets, but regardless, folks are going to ask "How come theirs > > is $700 for development and/or unlimited runtime...and yours isn't?".
> What do you mean?? GWL is open source. CMUCL will see it for the misers.
> They don't call it domino for nothin, and were going to knock it over.
"Will Hartung" <vft...@home.com> writes: > What's interesting is that probably the worst news to hit something > like Allegroserve and Franz (along with most any other commercial > Internet App server) is Apples recent announcement dropping their > WebObjects "unlimited" deployment version from $50,000 down to > $700. In the market, $50,000 was a competitive (if a bit high) > number. Many app server vendors are probably a bit grumpy right > now. WebObjects and Franz would probably hit completely different > markets, but regardless, folks are going to ask "How come theirs is > $700 for development and/or unlimited runtime...and yours isn't?".
The more remarkable thing is that WO is way ahead of any of it's competitors, and now it's going to be cheaper by an order of magnitude. Not only is the web app development toolkit, the WO Framework, much more cohesive, flexible, and scalable than any of the competing frameworks, but the database interface, the EOF, is a friggin' gem as well.
Despite the fact that WO provides solutions for problems that are several levels above what the competitors are just now addressing (and failing miserably with the EJB standard), this is still basic infrastructure for building web apps. I believe it would benefit Common Lisp quite a bit for this infrastructure to be Free Software, available to all commercial and non-commercial entities in the lisp community. This is neccesary to provide the basic level of functionality needed to deliver internet applications, letting developers concentrate on solving the problems that CL excels at.
The groundwork has already been done, but there is more work to do, porting to the various CL runtimes, documenting, and adding collections of commonly used interface components.
-- Craig Brozefsky <cr...@red-bean.com> Free Scheme/Lisp Software http://www.red-bean.com/~craig "Hiding like thieves in the night from life, illusions of oasis making you look twice. -- Mos Def and Talib Kweli
On Tue, 16 May 2000 12:47:52 -0500, "Andrew K. Wolven"
<awol...@redfernlane.org> wrote: >> Please, enlighten us. O:-) I also have to save some client >> related stuff into a database (results of a search, so I can show the >> first 10 matches and latter show the rest without repeating the >> query), and I'm not sure when to "GC" the temporary tables holding >> that info. I was planning to use a chron process to cleanup every >> entry older than X minutes... :-?
>It would be useful to know what Lisp platforms you intend to use.
LispWorks
>What is the OS?
Linux and Apache. I probably won't be able to change this (Apache).
>Are you wanting to set up a Lisp web server, or are you wanting to set up a >web-application server to be run under a conventional server? (such as under >Apache)
The latter.
>Less critical: what DB do you want to use, and what do you plan to store in it?
I'm considering interbase.
>For now go to allegroserve.sourceforge.net and download allegroserve. There is >a file you will find very useful (htmlgen.cl). Htmlgen is the simplest of the >simple in terms of dynamic html generation with common lisp. Even if you plan >to use templates, you will find this macro very useful.
OK, bt is this a http server? What would really interesting (IMHO) would be an application server for CL....
//----------------------------------------------- // Fernando Rodriguez Romero // // frr at mindless dot com //------------------------------------------------
On Wed, 17 May 2000 01:33:35 -0500, "Andrew K. Wolven"
<awol...@redfernlane.org> wrote: >Franz damn well knows that I am going to be knocking at their door as soon as I >get a customer flow. We have maybe two more things to nail down in GWL before >we are going after the Lotus Notes market.
Please forgive my ignorance, but...GWL??? :-?
//----------------------------------------------- // Fernando Rodriguez Romero // // frr at mindless dot com //------------------------------------------------
Stig> Philip Lijnzaad <lijnz...@ebi.ac.uk> writes: Fernando> first 10 matches and latter show the rest without repeating the Fernando> query),
>> Is this really necessary? If your data is (made) local and indexes are good, >> chances are that re-running the query is faster ...
Stig> One problem is that with a dynamic database, rerunning the query can Stig> give you a different result, which will look rather odd.
yes, granted. And anyway, even when re-running the query, there is still client state to be kept track of, namely which window on the (stored or re-queried) data needs to be served as the 'next page'. But query results are usually more voluminous than the queries (query strings) themselves, so at least the amount of state-to-be-stored can be minimized, and perhaps even access is faster. Philip -- /dev/brain: character special (53/0) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Philip Lijnzaad, lijnz...@ebi.ac.uk | European Bioinformatics Institute,rm A2-24 +44 (0)1223 49 4639 | Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton +44 (0)1223 49 4468 (fax) | Cambridgeshire CB10 1SD, GREAT BRITAIN PGP fingerprint: E1 03 BF 80 94 61 B6 FC 50 3D 1F 64 40 75 FB 53
* Rainer Joswig <rainer.jos...@ision.net> | Minus the price of ACL to be able to run it.
Geez, _that's_ an intelligent counter-argument. Can you please be explicit and explain your real beef with Franz Inc?
| Hey, they even now are using hierarchical packages. | Seems like they are going to have a Lisp dialect | of there own.
Although I don't necessarily think hierarchical packages is a good move, they have published the source code necessary to make _any_ Common Lisp get hierarchical packages. It affects a single function in the Common Lisp package. I'm impressed with your ability to label this a "dialect", because it clearly suggests supernatural mental powers.
#:Erik -- If this is not what you expected, please alter your expectations.
Rainer Joswig wrote: > Hey, they even now are using hierarchical packages. > Seems like they are going to have a Lisp dialect > of there own.
Being hard of thinking: what is up with this? Unless this breaks existing code (which I assume it doesn't) and is not enforced in such a way that have rather than choose to use hierarchical packages (which again is another assumption, a something I would probably choose not to use because of portability issues)...
| Hey, they even now are using hierarchical packages. Seems like they | are going to have a Lisp dialect of there own.
* William Deakin <wi...@pindar.com> | Being hard of thinking: what is up with this?
It's Rainer Joswig having a personal gripe with Franz Inc, but he isn't honest enough to come out and state his real issue. From what I have seen in the past, there isn't _anything_ Franz Inc can do to appease him, either, so an informed choice is to ignore his noise.
| Unless this breaks existing code (which I assume it doesn't) and is | not enforced in such a way that have rather than choose to use | hierarchical packages (which again is another assumption, a | something I would probably choose not to use because of portability | issues)...
If you call find-package (or cause it to be called) with a string designator that starts with a dot, there is no package so named, the current package contains a dot in its name, there is a package with the same name up to the dot and the string you gave find-package from the dot, you will not get nil, but that package. I'm sure this affects _some_ existing code.
Hierarchical packages have been added to aid in portability. It's probably more an attempt to cater to the Java crowd, however. I'm not sure what this will buy the Lisp community, but this is one of the most innocuous changes I have seen anyone suggest.
#:Erik -- If this is not what you expected, please alter your expectations.
* Rainer Joswig wrote: > Hey, they even now are using hierarchical packages. > Seems like they are going to have a Lisp dialect > of there own.
Well, I think it's kind of the idea that implementors should get to experiment with extensions so that in due course some consensus can emerge about what the right way of doing things is and a standard can be evolved. I don't know about the hierarchical package stuff, and I do know that I don't desperately like some of the other things they're doing, but I'm definitely glad that they're doing *something* to evolve CL, while making information available about what they're implementing.
* Erik Naggum | ...[elided a description of ACL find-package]... I'm sure this | affects _some_ existing code.
* William Deakin | Agreed. But as you say, in a quite innocuous fashion.
I _was_ being facetious with that last comment. I don't actually think _any_ existing code will notice anything. (Rainer Joswig may now helpfully provide a contrived counter-example, of course.)
#:Erik -- If this is not what you expected, please alter your expectations.
