[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [Axiom-developer] AldorForAxiom

From: Bill Page
Subject: RE: [Axiom-developer] AldorForAxiom
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 10:38:22 -0500


On March 15, 2006 5:10 PM you wrote:
> ... 
> Now I've got runtime.o. Step 9 took about half an hour on a 1.6 GHz 
> Centrino Laptop with 512 MB ;-).

Yes, that is the main step. There is a nice little topological
sort of the dependencies done in Java that I think should really
be done in Aldor. In fact, Tim Daly **insists** that we should
not add Java to the list of prerequisits for building Axiom, so
when we begin distributing Aldor with the Axiom distribution we
will have some work to do. :)
> But I still wonder why all these .o files are needed for the 
> execution inside Axiom. I could understand .ao files, but .o
> files?

These are the compiled algebra files just like the ones
generated from SPAD.

> Interestingly, when I say ")co" Axiom prints:
>     Compiling AXIOM source code from file /home/hemmecke/
>     using AXIOM-XL compiler and options
> -O -Fasy -Fao -Flsp -laxiom -Mno-AXL_W_WillObsolete -DAxiom -Y 
> $AXIOM/algebra
>        Use the system command )set compiler args to change these
>        options.
> And if I then look into my directory I see.
>  >ls fact*
>  fact.asy  fact.fn  fact.lsp  fact.o
> Where did the .o file come from?

It was compiled by GCL from the .lsp source which was generated
by Aldor. (Notice option '-Flsp' above.

> So ")co" is not the same as calling

Almost, except you need to compile the generated lisp.

> Where should I look to make ")compile" more transparent to me.

Unfortunately I can only suggests the Axiom source code.

> And someone tell what happens when I execute "fact 4" in
> Axiom after compiling ")co"? I always believed that
> Axiom executes LISP code. So why is there any need for a .o
> file?

Axiom executes *compiled* lisp code. The .o files are machine
code object files that are loaded dynamically by GCL.

> Or are all these .o files just there so that I can produce
> standalone programs that run without AXIOM?


> That should in priciple be possible once I have,
> I just haven't tried it yet.

Let me know if you succeed.

Peter: Please correct me if I have described any of this
incorrectly. Thanks.

Bill Page.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]