New SBCL release

« previous entry | next entry »
Jan. 29th, 2008 | 08:51 am

It's time, once again, for a new SBCL release. SBCL is released once a month, rain or shine, so a release means "it's the end of the month", not "important new features merit a release." That doesn't mean the features aren't important, just that you don't necessarily have to run out and get a new SBCL just because there's a new one.

The NEWS file in the SBCL release chronicles what's new from release to release. Here are the NEWS entries for 1.0.14:

changes in sbcl-1.0.14 relative to sbcl-1.0.13:

  • new feature: SB-EXT:*EXIT-HOOKS* are called when the process exits (see documentation for details.)
  • revived support for OpenBSD (contributed by Josh Elsasser)
  • partially fixed bug #108: ROOM no longer suffers from occasional (AVER (SAP= CURRENT END)) failures .
  • fixed bug #402: proclaimed non-standard declarations in DEFMETHOD bodies no longer cause a WARNING to be signalled. (reported by Vincent Arkesteijn)
  • bug fix: (TRUNCATE X 0) when X is a bignum now correctly signals DIVISION-BY-ZERO. Similarly for MOD and REM (which suffered due to the bug in TRUNCATE.) (reported by Michael Weber)
  • bug fix: SB-SPROF:REPORT no longer signals an error if there are no samples. (reported by Andy Hefner)
  • bug fix: functions compiled using (COMPILE NIL '(LAMBDA ...)) no longer appear as (NIL ...) frames in backtraces.
  • bug fix: RESOLVE-CONFLICT (and the other name conflict machinery) is now actually exported from SB-EXT as documented. (reported by Maciej Katafiasz)
  • bug fix: sb-aclrepl now correctly understands how to inspect single-floats on 64-bit platforms where single-floats are not boxed.
  • bug fix: SB-MOP:CLASS-SLOTS now signals an error if the class has not yet been finalized. (reported by Levente Meszaros)
  • bug fix: CLOSE :ABORT T behaves more correctly on Windows.
  • DESCRIBE and (DOCUMENTATION ... 'OPTIMIZE) describe meaning of SBCL-specific optimize qualities.

You can also watch SBCL's development progress by reading Planet SBCL.

Tags:

Link | Leave a comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend

Comments {4}

Binaries?

from: anonymous
date: Jan. 29th, 2008 05:05 pm (UTC)
Link

Is there some reason there were no binaries for x86 for .13?

Reply | Thread

Zach Beane

Re: Binaries?

from: [info]xach
date: Jan. 29th, 2008 05:06 pm (UTC)
Link

Nobody bothered to do it, I suppose.

Reply | Parent | Thread

Re: Binaries?

from: anonymous
date: Jan. 29th, 2008 09:09 pm (UTC)
Link

Easy with clbuild anyway.

Reply | Parent | Thread

lispnik

(no subject)

from: [info]lispnik
date: Jan. 30th, 2008 08:32 am (UTC)
Link

Arc is far behind. Ha! :)

Reply | Thread