[gambit-list] What's in your gambc.scm file?
nikki at crysalis.com
Fri Oct 2 09:59:14 EDT 2009
On 02/10/2009 2:53 PM, Per Eckerdal wrote:
>> If I remember correctly, blackhole is "loaded" from a command line "-
>> e" argument. That's not a good integration. It would be better to
>> start it from the ~~lib/gambcext file, which is another customization
>> file that is loaded before ~/.gambcini . Here is the relevant part of
>> the documentation:
> Thanks for the info.
> Yes, at the moment blackhole is loaded using a "-e" command line
> argument. I didn't know any other way of doing it. When I get the time
> I'll try using ~~lib/gamcext. Loading blackhole is not a complex
> process at all, it is simply loaded using the |load| procedure.
I found a nice way of implementing loading blackhole via the extensions
init file, and still having a seperate bsc/gsc command pair, by
symbolically linking bsc -> gsc, and putting:
(if (equal? (car (command-line)) "bsc")
(and (load "~~/lib/modules/build")
(display "loaded blackhole extensions...")
In my /usr/local/Gambit-C/lib/gambcext file.
This would probably need some tweaking to work on windows platforms
(probably just checking if it starts with 'bsc' and ignoring case, then
copy gsc.exe to bsc.exe would work).
The advantage of this is that I still get the gsc header message - it's
always bugged me a little that the 'normal' way of defining bsc meant
you didn't see the version info of gambit, it bit me once when i had
4.5.0 and 4.5.1 installed in slightly different places, both with a
blackhole system installed (in one case, woefully out of date). Also I
can see at a glance that blackhole is listed by the display message in
the load process.
To be honest, since I use bsc/blackhole 100% of the time on my install,
I'm starting to wonder if there is really any benefit to having a
seperate bsc/gsc pair of commands though - at least in my personal case.
More information about the Gambit-list