perm filename MSGS[PAT,LMM] blob
sn#061080 filedate 1973-09-05 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT ⊗ VALID 00010 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002 ANOTHER PATTERN PROBLEM IS: THERE ARE
C00003 00003 From: CARHART Re: CYCGEN (?)BUGS(?)
C00009 00004 Date: 5-SEP-73 1950-PDT From: SRIDHARAN Re: LABELLING PAPER
C00010 00005 Date: 5-SEP-73 1955-PDT From: SRIDHARAN Re: NEW FILES
C00012 00006 Re: <DEUTSCH>VHASH
C00013 00007 From: MASINTER Re: RECORDS
C00019 00008 FROM TEITELMAN:
C00022 00009 From: BRYANT at BBN-TENEX
C00033 00010 From: BRYANT at BBN-TENEX
C00042 ENDMK
C⊗;
ANOTHER PATTERN PROBLEM IS: THERE ARE
TOO MANY EXTRA CHECKS WHEN A * IS GIVEN -- ALTHOUGH IT CANMATCHNIL,
THE CHECK IS IMPLICITELY DONE AT THE END; THUS NO CHECK NEED BE DONE
INTERNALLY.
SOLUTION: CHANGED THE (* . &) OR (* . $) TO SOMEHTING ELSE WHICH
CAN'T MATCH NIL, AND SO THAT THE WM IN (* . &) DOESN'T CALL THE
LOWER MATCHWM WITH (& ...)
From: CARHART Re: CYCGEN (?)BUGS(?)
OK, LARRY, WATCH THIS...
@LISP
BBN LISP-10 12-11-72 ...
GOOD MORNING.
←SYSIN(<SRID↑FS$)
(<SRIDHARAN>STRGEN.SYS;33)
←EDITE((0))
EDIT
*(1(STRUCFORM NOFV-RINGS (3 2 0 0 0 2)))
*P
((STRUCFORM NOFV-RINGS &))
*1 DO
LEVEL 0, FORMS:1-11
*PP
[STRUCFORM LIST (STRUCFORM ATTACHBIVALENTS ((0 . 9)
(3 . 1))
(STRUCFORM CATALOG
(2 0 0 0 2)))
(STRUCFORM ATTACHBIVALENTS ((0 . 8)
(1 . 1)
(2 . 1))
(STRUCFORM CATALOG (2 0 0 0 2)))
(STRUCFORM ATTACHBIVALENTS ((0 . 7)
(1 . 3))
(STRUCFORM CATALOG (2 0 0 0 2)))
(STRUCFORM ATTACHBIVS&LOOPS ((1 . 2))
(NIL [(((1 . 2)) . 1]
NIL
[(((NIL . 1)) . 1]
NIL NIL)
(STRUCFORM CATALOG (3 0 1 0 1)))
(STRUCFORM ATTACHBIVS&LOOPS ((2 . 1))
(NIL [(((1 . 2)) . 1]
NIL
[(((NIL . 1)) . 1]
NIL NIL)
(STRUCFORM CATALOG (3 0 1 0 1)))
(STRUCFORM ATTACHBIVS&LOOPS ((1 . 1))
(NIL [(((2 . 2)) . 1]
NIL
[(((NIL . 1)) . 1]
NIL NIL)
(STRUCFORM CATALOG (3 0 1 0 1)))
(STRUCFORM ATTACHBIVS&LOOPS NIL (NIL [(((3 . 2)) . 1]
NIL
[(((NIL . 1)) . 1]
NIL NIL)
(STRUCFORM CATALOG (3 0 1 0 1)))
(STRUCFORM ATTACHBIVS&LOOPS ((1 . 1))
(NIL [(((1 . 2)) . 2]
NIL
[(((NIL . 1)) . 2]
NIL NIL)
(STRUCFORM CATALOG (4 0 2)))
(STRUCFORM ATTACHBIVS&LOOPS ((1 . 1))
(NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL)
(STRUCFORM CATALOG (2 0 0 0 1)))
(STRUCFORM ATTACHBIVS&LOOPS NIL
(NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL)
(STRUCFORM CATALOG (2 0 0 0 1)))
(STRUCFORM ATTACHBIVS&LOOPS NIL (NIL [(((1 . 2)) . 1]
NIL
[(((1 . 1)) . 1]
NIL NIL)
(STRUCFORM CATALOG (3 0 1]
*↑C
@;TWO THINGS. 1)ABOVE, THERE IS A CALL TO ATTBVS&
LOOPS WITH ALL-NIL ARGS. I DON'T GET THAT. 2)THERE ARE REFS
@;TO CATALOGS (3 0 1 0 1) AND (2 0 0 0 1), BOTH OF WHICH
@;CONTAIN AN ODD NUMBER OF ODD-VALENT NODES, SO THERE HAS TO BE A FV
@;AROUND SOMEWHERE.
RAY
Date: 5-SEP-73 1950-PDT From: SRIDHARAN Re: LABELLING PAPER
- - - -
I HEARD FROM DENNIS SMITH THAT YOU WERE STILL WORKING ON THE
LABELLING PAPER. THE CYCGEN PAPER IS READY AND WE ARE MAKING THE
COPIES NEEDED TO MAIL THEM OUT. COULD YOU GIVE ME A REALISTIC
ESTIMATE OF WHEN YOU EXPECT TO HAVE THE SECOND PAPER DONE? THANKS
MUCH. PLEASE ENLIGHTEN ME ON WHAT YOUR SCHEDULE IS AND WHAT YOUR
PLANS ARE FOR COMING FEW WEEKS.
Date: 5-SEP-73 1955-PDT From: SRIDHARAN Re: NEW FILES
- - - -
THERE IS A NEW STRGEN.SYS;34 UNDER MY DIRECTORY.
RAY CARHART DISCOVERED A BUG IN THE LABELLER REMPERMS WAS BEING COMPUTED
WRONGLY. I HAVE TRACED THE PROBLEM TO INCORRECT MAINTENANCE OF
EDGE ORDERINGS AND NODE ORDERING. THE ROUTINE CHECK SEEMS TO DEPEND
CRITICALLY ON THESE ORDERINGS. I HAVE FIXED TWO FUNCTIONS
LABELM -- WHEREIN I INDUCE A FORCED ORDERING OF THE CTENTRIES
IN ASCENDING ORDER OF NODENUMBERS; AND CLASSIFY3 -- ENSURING THAT THIS
FUNCTION DOES NOT KILL THE ORDER IN CLASSIFYING.
GENLISP FILE HAS THE FUNCTION DIFF. THERE AGAIN AN XLIST WAS CHANGED
TO LIST.
BYE
Re: <DEUTSCH>VHASH
From: MASINTER Re: RECORDS
- - - -
MAKE THE RPLAC THING DEPEND ON LOCAL DECLARATIO RATHER THAN
DECLARATION AT TIME OF RECORD CALL....
COMPOSE SHUD TAKE NAM←X, DO SPELLING CORRECTION, AND CHECK FOR IRRELAVANT NAMES....
POSSIBLY (RPLACFQ (FIELD X) VAL), (/RPLACFQ (FIELD X) VAL)
(FRPLACFQ (FIELD X) VAL),,,
WITH (RPLACFQ ...) DEFINED?, DWIMIFIED WITH TRANSLATION HIDDEN?
TO THE APPROPRIATE THING.
(TAKES ANYTHING,NOT JUST FIELD NAMES....)
SUGGESTION... IF X IS A FIELD NAME ALREADY, AND A NEW RECORD IS
DECLARED WITH X DIFFERENT... THEN CHANGE X IN THE OLD RECORD
TO RECNAME.X.... THE TRANSLATION OF VAR:X WILL THEN DO
A LOOKUP ON VAR TO SEE IF IT HAS BEEN DECLARED TO BE OF ONE
OF THE RECORDS.....
-------
From: JACKSON
Re: RECORDS
- - - -
LARRY,
IT LOOKS LIKE YOU DESCRIBE THE SAME KIND OF CAPABILITY FOR HANDLING
AND CREATING DATA TYPES, THOUGH I SHOULD ADMIT THAT I DON'T KNOW
VERY MUCH ABOUT THE SUBJECT..
PHIL
FROM TEITELMAN:
THE IN VALID TRQANNSLATING AS IN (VALID X)
WAS A BUG IN THE CODE. IT SHOULD NEVER DO THIS
FOR IN/ON'S, TO'S, FROM'S, OR FOR, BIND, OR AS.
IT DOES MAKE SENSE FOR BY. E,G, FOR X IN Y BY CDDR.
I WILL PROBABLY IMPLEMENT MOST OF YOUR SUGGESTIONS
IN THE MEMO.
THANX FOR TRACKING DOWN THE COMPILER PROBLEM.
WARREN
-------
30-AUG-73 23:54:35,1408
-------
Date: 30-AUG-73 2354
From: TEITELMAN
Re: MEMO
- - - -
I HAVE BEEN PROCESSING YOUR EMO. HERE ARE THE VERDICTS:
(1) I IMPLEMENTED THE SUBPAIR CHANGE, AND ASSUMING BBN DOESNT
SQUAWK TOO LOUDLY IT WILL GO THROUGH. CHECK IT OUT IN NEXT LOAUP.
(2) NO ON TAILP. THE VALUE OF
TAILP IS THE TAIL, SO RETURNING T WHEN GIVEN NIL AS ITS FIRST
AAGUMENT IS DANGEROUS, AND MAY INFFACT DISRUPT SOME
PROGRAMS THAT ALREADY UTILIZE THIS FACT AND THUS DONT
DO (AND X (TAALP X Y)) CHECKS. SUGGEST YOU WRITE YOUR
OWN VERSON, CALL IT TAILPRED, AND ALWAYS HAVE IT RETURN
T OR NIL.
(3) FIXED THE NTH PROBLEM, NTH((A . B) 2) = B, NTH((A . ) 3) = NIL.
(4) LET ME WAIT ON ANSWERING THIS FOR A WHILE.
(I DIDNT UNDERSTAND IT COMPLETELY)
(5) DONT AGREE WITH CONC AND LCONC, SINCE THAT COSTS ANOTHER CONS,
AND ON SHORT LISTS, THIS IS MORE THAN THE COST OF CDRING
DOWN. I WOULD CONSIDER ADDING A TCOLLECT OR SOME SUCH THING.
(6) POSTPONE THIS. I LOOKED AT IT ONCE AND IT SEEMED HARD.
LETS TALK ABOUT IT.
(7) OK. EXCEPT THAT THAT WAY IT DOESNT GET ON THE HISTORY LIST.
(8) I FORWARDED THIS COMPLAINT TO BBN.
(9) I FIXED THIS.
(10) SORRY NO CAN DO. R AND RC ONLY WORK WITHIN
THE CURRENT EXPRESSION, THEY DONT DO UPS OR ANY SUCH THING.
SO THEY CANT WORK. I COULD DO A SPECIAL
CHECK TO AVOID DOING THE CHAACTER RECOGNITION
THING FIRST, BUT SEEMS FRIVOULOUS..
WARREN
From: BRYANT at BBN-TENEX
Re: HELP
- - - -
COULD YOU GIVE ME THE DETAILS ON HOW I CAN USE YOUR
PRINTOUT ROUTINE AT AI LAB? THAT IS, IF YOU DON'T MIND MY USING IT
ONCE A WEEK OR ONCE EVERY OTHER WEEK. THE QUESTIONS ARE:
1. TO WHAT FILE DO I SHIP MY FILES FROM BBN TO AI LAB. I THINK I HAVE
AN ACCOUNT THERE BUT AM NOT SURE.
2. ONCE THE FILE IS THERE, THEN WHAT DO I DO?
HAVE BEEN USING CLISP AND I REALLY LIKE IT. THANX.
PENNY
-------
From: BRYANT at BBN-TENEX
Re: LISTING FILES AT AI LAB
- - - -
THANKS FOR THE INSTRUCTION - YOUR'RE REALLY GREAT. I'LL TRY IT TODAY.
-------
Date: 4-SEP-73 2015
From: TEITELMAN
Re: SYSTEM DATE
cc: LISP USERS
- - - -
THE VALUE OF THE VARIABLE MAKESYSDATE WILL BE
THE DATE THE SYSTEM MADE. THIS SHULD AID IN
TRACKING DOWN WHICH SYSTEM YOUR SYSOUT WAS MADE FROM.
WARREN
-------
Date: 4-SEP-73 2016
From: TEITELMAN
cc: LAMPSON
- - - -
I REMEMBERED WHY I WANTED TO PRINT SMALL LISTS ON
THE SAME LINE: FOR THINGS LIKE
(IF (FOO X) AND (FIE Y) MEMB Z ...
HOWEVER I THINK I CAN DISTINGUISH THESES CASES
FROM THE TROUBLESOME ONES.
WARREN
-------
Date: 5-SEP-73 1147
From: TEITELMAN
Re: NEW LISP, CHANGES IN ITERATIVE STATEMENT
cc: LISP USERS
- - - -
THERE IS ANOTHER NEW LISP. THE PRETTYPRINT ALGORITHM
FOR CLISP HAS BEEN CHAGED SLIGHTLY. ALSO THERE
HAVE BEEN SOME NEW ITERATIVE STATEMENT OPERATORS,
ALWAYS, NEVER, AND THEREIS, PLUS SOME CHANGES TO
THE FUNCTION I.S.OPR DESCRIBED IN THE MEMO
<LISP>LISP.MEMO.
WARREN
-------
5-SEP-73 17:40:23,81
-------