Skip to content

FILEBROWSER can't be saved and compiled #203

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
rmkaplan opened this issue Feb 21, 2021 · 11 comments
Closed

FILEBROWSER can't be saved and compiled #203

rmkaplan opened this issue Feb 21, 2021 · 11 comments

Comments

@rmkaplan
Copy link
Contributor

Describe the bug
FILEBROWSER was last made and compiled in 2001.

When I tried to make a change to the file and recompiled, I got a bad compiled error on loading the compiled file.
To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:

  1. Full sysout
  2. Load EXPORTS.ALL)
  3. LOAD(FILEBROWSER PROP)
  4. MAKEFILE(FILEBROWSER)
  5. TCOMPL(FILEBROWSER)
  6. LOAD(FILEBROWSER.LCOM)
    It stops with a bad-compiled function error.

Context (please complete the following information):

  • OS: Mac
  • OS Version: Big Sur
@nbriggs
Copy link
Contributor

nbriggs commented Feb 21, 2021

Have a look at the source that was written (outside Lisp) -- there's a CR embedded in the middle of the copyright notice, and that matches up with exactly where things went downhill in the LCOM. The "bad compiled function: 2021" that it's complaining about is the 2021 in the copyright notice that seems to have been copied through into the LCOM.

@nbriggs
Copy link
Contributor

nbriggs commented Feb 21, 2021

And, if I delete the extra CR in the copyright notice (in an external texteditor) and then TCOMPL the file it works to produce a well-formed LCOM.

@rmkaplan
Copy link
Contributor Author

rmkaplan commented Feb 21, 2021 via email

@nbriggs
Copy link
Contributor

nbriggs commented Feb 21, 2021

I was doing that on the original FILEBROWSER file -- the error is in what the file package writes for the new source. I don't have your modified source file -- but I can show you what you'd need to edit in your newly written version:
it should be:

^M; Copyright (c) 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1993, 1994, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2021 by Venue & Xerox Corporation.  All rights reserved.^M

rather than

^M; Copyright (c) 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1993, 1994, 1999, 2000, 2001,
^M 2021 by Venue & Xerox Corporation.  All rights reserved.^M

(where ^M represents an embedded carriage return)

@rmkaplan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks to Nick's sleuthing, this has been identified as an ancient bug in the function (PRINTCOPYRIGHT1 in PRETTY) that prints the copyright dates. The bug shows up when you have a lot of years in the list (as FILEBROWSER does) and the readtable is a commonlisp readtable with semi-colon enabled. Lines were overflowing because LINELENGTH was exceeded when they shouldn't have.

This is fixed in a new version of PRETTY.

@masinter
Copy link
Member

If you load SYSEDIT (which, in turn, loads EXPORTS.ALL) you'll get a couple more FLG's set.
I'll raise an issue about not adding new dates to old copyright.

@nbriggs
Copy link
Contributor

nbriggs commented Feb 21, 2021

The sysouts should probably have a new default copyright owner, representing whoever we think we are... "Interlisp.org"? It should presumably maintain the original copyright owner notices and add entries for the updated one going forward.

@rmkaplan
Copy link
Contributor Author

rmkaplan commented Feb 21, 2021 via email

@masinter
Copy link
Member

I'm not sure what the right thing should be. For now, it would be sufficient to just leave COPYRIGHT alone. We don't want to change assertions of copyright. I think Interlisp.org is just a website, which will get you to the LICENSE file and context.

@masinter
Copy link
Member

i did make a new issue #207

@rmkaplan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Copyright moved to an new issue. This problem with FILEBROWSER is fixed. Closing

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants