More grinding out the manual.

parent 2e8328cc
......@@ -17,18 +17,17 @@ Lisp standard. This manual documents the Armed Bear Common Lisp
implementation for users of the system.
\subsection{Version}
This manual corresponds to abcl-0.27.0, as yet unreleased.
This manual corresponds to abcl-0.28.0, as yet unreleased.
\chapter{Running}
ABCL is packaged as a single jar file (usually named either
``abcl.jar'' or something like``abcl-0.27.1.jar'' if you are using a
``abcl.jar'' or something like``abcl-0.28.0.jar'' if you are using a
versioned package) that can be executed under the
control of a suitable JVM as follows
\begin{listing-shell}
cmd\$ java -jar abcl.jar
cmd$ java -jar abcl.jar
\end{listing-shell}
For this command to work, the ``java'' executable needs to be in your
......@@ -40,7 +39,7 @@ or a DOS command script under Windows so that ABCL may be executed
simply as:
\begin{listing-shell}
cmd\$ abcl
cmd$ abcl
\end{listing-shell}
\section{Options}
......@@ -90,8 +89,9 @@ ABCL is currently a non-conforming ANSI Common Lisp implementation due
to the following (known) issues:
\begin{itemize}
\item Lack of long form of DEFINE-METHOD-COMBINATION
\item Missing statement of conformance in accompanying documentation
\item The generic function sigatures of the DOCUMENTATION symbol do
not match the CLHS.
\end{itemize}
ABCL aims to be be a fully conforming ANSI Common Lisp
......@@ -101,13 +101,15 @@ implementation. Any other behavior should be reported as a bug.
In addition to ANSI conformance, ABCL strives to implement features
expected of a contemporary Common Lisp.
\begin{itemize}
\item Incomplete MOP
\item Incomplete (A)MOP
% N.B.
% TODO go through AMOP with symbols, starting by looking for
% matching function signature.
% XXX is this really blocking ANSI conformance? Answer: we have
% to start with such a ``census'' to determine what we have.
\item Incomplete Gray Streams
\item Incomplete Streams: need suitable abstraction between ANSI
and Gray streams.
\end{itemize}
\chapter{Interaction with host JVM}
......@@ -189,12 +191,13 @@ Java process it will return null, so if you are writing Java whose
life-cycle is a bit out of your control (like in a Java servlet), a
safer invocation pattern might be:
\begin{code}[java]
\begin{listing-java}
Interpreter interpreter = Interpreter.getInstance();
if (interpreter == null) {
interpreter = Interpreter.createInstance();
}
\end{code}
\end{listing-java}
The Lisp \code{eval} primitive may be simply passed strings for evaluation,
as follows
......@@ -323,8 +326,31 @@ implementation, ABCL endeavors to include extensions beyond the ANSI
specification which are either widely adopted or are especially useful
in working with the hosting JVM.
\section{Extensible Sequences}
\section{Implementation Dependent}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Compiler to JVM 5 bytecode
\item Pathname extensionsn
\end{enumerate}
\section{Pathname}
ABCL has created three specializations of the ANSI Pathname construct
to enable to use of URIs to address dynamically loaded resources for
the JVM.
PATHNAME : URL-PATHNAME : JAR-PATHNAME
: LOGICAL-PATHNAME
Among other neat befits, this allows the ABCL user to laod dynamically
code from URIs like Quicklisp.
\begin{listing-lisp}
CL-USER> (load ''http://beta.quicklisp.org/quicklisp.lisp'')
\end{listing-lisp}
\section{Extensible Sequences}
\ref{RHODES2007}
......@@ -393,6 +419,9 @@ In 2006, the implementation was transferred to the current
maintainers, who have strived to improve its usability as a
contemporary Common Lisp implementation.
In 201x, with the publication of this Manual stating its confformance
to ANSI, we released abcl-1.0.
\end{document}
......
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment