[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Porting code to new PCL
- To: sbchanin@ai.mit.edu
- Subject: Re: Porting code to new PCL
- From: kanderso@DINO.BBN.COM
- Date: Mon, 09 Apr 90 14:47:36 -0400
- Cc: commonloops.PA@Xerox.COM
- In-reply-to: Your message of Sun, 08 Apr 90 07:30:54 -0400. <9004081130.AA07159@cocoa-krispies>
- Redistributed: commonloops.PA
Redistributed: commonloops.PA
From: Steve Chanin <sbchanin@ai.mit.edu>
Date: Sun, 8 Apr 90 07:30:54 EDT
To: commonloops.PA@xerox.com
Subject: Porting code to new PCL
Reply-To: sbchanin@ai.mit.edu
An MIT class for which I'm the teaching assistant has course software
which was written to run with old versions of pcl and lucid. I was trying to
patch it so, I could bring it up on the unix boxes in the AI lab which run
Lucid version 3 (the code now runs with an old version of pcl on Lucid 2.x).
Iftp a copy of the new release of pcl from xerox.com and it compiles fine on a
sparc. However when I try to compile the clas software I get all kinds of
conflicts between methods with the same name (defined on different classes)
which have different numbers of arguments. Are there any PCL wizards out there
PCL now enforce lambda list congruency between all methods of a
generic function. So you will have to change your defmethods.
k