Re: [Gcl-devel] ANSI 2.6.x vs 2.7.0

[Camm Maguire]

Greetings!

"Steven H. Rogers" <address@hidden> writes:

> I'm starting to experiment with GCL again.  2.6.7 ANSI still has some
> missing pieces and my understanding is that 2.7.0 is intended to be
> fully ANSI compliant. Is 2.7.0 stable enough for me work with, or
> should I stick with 2.6.x?
> 

This is a good question.  There are at least two more changes to the
compiler I'm trying to find time to get in -- remaining compiler
macros for builtins, and certain setq type propagation facilities.
That said, there are several people in UT and elsewhere using 2.7.0
for their work right now.  If you have a specific task in mind and
want to check that it works, perhaps we could make another testing tag
in CVS for your use and the use of others while the remaining work is
getting done.  

Take care,

> Regards,
> Steve
> 
> -- 
> Steven H. Rogers, PhD.
> Email: address@hidden    Weblog: http://shrogers.com/weblog
> "A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming is
> not worth knowing." - Alan Perlis
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gcl-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcl-devel
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Camm Maguire                                            address@hidden
==========================================================================
"The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens."  --  Baha'u'llah