[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Porting code to new PCL
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Porting code to new PCL
- From: Gregor.pa@Xerox.COM
- Date: Mon, 9 Apr 90 11:35 PDT
- Cc: commonloops.PA@Xerox.COM
- Fcc: BD:>Gregor>mail>outgoing-mail-9.text.newest
- In-reply-to: <9004081130.AA07159@cocoa-krispies>
- Line-fold: no
Date: Sun, 8 Apr 90 07:30:54 EDT
From: email@example.com (Steve Chanin)
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
how would be willing to talk to me about this stuff?
It sounds like the code in question isn't legal CLOS code.
Specifically, it sounds like it has lambda list congruence errors. You
need to look at the section of chapter 1 (which in my printing of the
spec is on age 1-25) which lays out the congruence for methods of a
Earlier versions of PCL were more lenient about this which is why the
code used to work. There is also information about this in some of the
recent xxx-notes.text files, you might want to read those.