[Openmcl-devel] New (070512) OpenMCL snapshots available

Rainer Joswig joswig at lisp.de
Sun May 13 10:44:42 UTC 2007


In article <20070513035056.I82683 at clozure.com>,
 Gary Byers <gb at clozure.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 13 May 2007, Christian Lynbech wrote:
> 
> > Is there a simple way to install more headers files for openmcl64?
> >
> > In  /usr/local/src/ccl/darwin-headers I see this:
> >
> >    addressbook carbon chud cocoa gl libc quicktime webkit
> >
> > whereas in  /usr/local/src/ccl/darwin-headers64 I only see:
> >
> >    chud libc
> >
> > In particular, I am missing header files for carbon and cocoa with is
> > a problem when I try to evaluate something like in openmcl64:
> >
> >    (require :cocoa)
> >
> 
> OSX 10.4 doesn't provide 64-bit versions of GUI libraries.  (It actually
> doesn't provide 64-bit versions of the CHUD libraries either, as of
> the last version of CHUD that I checked; the chud subdirectory of
> ccl/darwin-headers64 just contains a script that can be used to create
> headers from CHUD interfaces whenever a CHUD release with 64-bit versions
> of its libraries appears.)  You simply can't write 64-bit
> programs that use Cocoa or Carbon or other Apple GUI frameworks on
> OSX 10.4 (in C, OpenMCL, or otherwise.)
> 
> 64-bit versions of Cocoa, Carbon etc are an announced feature of OSX
> 10.5.  It seems reasonable to assume that 64-bit C/ObjC headers will
> also be provided with the development tools for 10.5, and that running
> those headers through OpenMCL's interface translator (see
> 
> <http://openmcl.clozure.com/Doc/index.html#The-Interface-Translator>)
> 
> will produce interfaces that OpenMCL can use.
> 
> [Probably a separate issue:
> 
> It also seems reasonable to assume that some people will want to use
> prerelease versions of Leopard (OSX 10.5) with OpenMCL, and it would
> be in those users' interests (and OpenMCL's) if they were able to use
> Carbon and Cocoa from OpenMCL under those Leopard prereleases.  People
> who have access to prerelease versions of Leopard have that access
> under non-disclosure, and (being paranoid about it) it's not clear
> whether distributing Leopard interfaces would violate the terms of
> some NDA.  (If it actually does, that'd be pretty stupid, but it'd
> probably be equally stupid to assume that it doesn't only to be
> told otherwise by an Apple lawyer.)]

Why not ask somebody from Apple? From Developer Support?
It would be sad, if Apple allowed it and for OpenMCL it
wasn't possible just because nobody asked a Developer
relations person from Apple?

-- 
http://lispm.dyndns.org




More information about the Openmcl-devel mailing list