Avoiding LispWorks Personal annoyances
in [Lisp]
|
Prev: &optional combined with &rest
Next: local-time on Clozure CL windows vista 64 Can't resolve foreign symbol "gettimeofday"
From: D Herring on 28 Sep 2009 01:33 gnubeard wrote: > For those annoyed with the 5-hour timeout in LispWorks Personal > Edition: > > You can disable the time-out by using the library interposition > mechanism on your platform (LD_PRELOAD on linux, DYLD_INSERT_LIBRARIES > on Mac .. not sure about a mechanism on Windows). .... Whereas I think the trial versions of LispWorks and Allegro are overly restrictive, the moral way to avoid their annoyances is to use a different implementation. There are plenty to choose from. - Daniel
From: Pascal Costanza on 28 Sep 2009 02:42 gnubeard wrote: > On Sep 28, 1:07 am, Pascal Costanza <p...(a)p-cos.net> wrote: >> This sounds reasonable to me. You could have saved yourself some effort >> if you had told this to the LispWorks guys. As far as I know, they are >> quite helpful in providing unlimited evaluation copies for a limited >> timeframe (of a couple of months, or so). > > I've seen this sort of thing mentioned a few times in this thread. It > is quite encouraging to know that the staff of LW is this helpful. It > certainly goes a ways toward encouraging me to buy a copy when the > time comes. > > OTOH, this whole kludge was really very little effort. I really doubt > anyone at LW could have received my email, gone through whatever > process they have for supplying such an evaluation, and gotten back to > me about it in less time that it took to develop the replacement > gettimeofday().. My experiences with the LispWorks crew is a lot more positive than you seem to expect. Pascal -- My website: http://p-cos.net Common Lisp Document Repository: http://cdr.eurolisp.org Closer to MOP & ContextL: http://common-lisp.net/project/closer/
From: gnubeard on 28 Sep 2009 07:37 On Sep 28, 2:05 pm, Raffael Cavallaro <raffaelcavall...(a)pas.espam.s.il.vous.plait.mac.com> wrote: > On 2009-09-27 22:48:10 -0400, gnubeard <gnube...(a)gmail.com> said: > > > Circumventing one, or all, of those limitations while continuing to > > use it non-commercially is not in violation of the license agreement. > > "You may not translate, reverse > engineer, decompile, disassemble, modify or create > derivative works based on the materials, except as > expressly permitted by the law of this Agreement." > > Seems to me that your hack entailed some reverse engineering > (admittedly simple, but reverse engineering nevertheless), which > reverse engineering was not expressly permitted by the agreement. Seems > to me like you've laid yourself open to section 16. I'm baffled. How is creating my own implementation of a standard C function reverse engineering, in any sense of the term? Or how is loading said function with a standard ld feature reverse engineering? I just read the entire wiki article on reverse engineering, thinking that my understanding of the term might be the problem.. the thesis of the article is thus: Reverse engineering (RE) is the process of discovering the technological principles of a device, object or system through analysis of its structure, function and operation. It often involves taking something (e.g., a mechanical device, electronic component, or software program) apart and analyzing its workings in detail to be used in maintenance, or to try to make a new device or program that does the same thing without copying anything from the original. I don't see how any of that that applies, at all.
From: gnubeard on 28 Sep 2009 07:42 On Sep 28, 4:42 pm, Pascal Costanza <p...(a)p-cos.net> wrote: > gnubeard wrote: > > I've seen this sort of thing mentioned a few times in this thread. It > > is quite encouraging to know that the staff of LW is this helpful. It > > certainly goes a ways toward encouraging me to buy a copy when the > > time comes. > My experiences with the LispWorks crew is a lot more positive than you > seem to expect. > > Pascal I didn't mean to suggest that I thought that the LW guys wouldn't provide good service - I just mean that, from my reading of the website, I didn't notice anything regarding time-limited evaluations advertised, or even a statement that other options are available and that I should contact someone, etc. Then again, I admit I didn't look very hard .. I knew that LW offered a personal edition, and I went there, looked around rather briefly, downloaded the software and then spent most of my time in their manuals, not on their website.
From: Joost Kremers on 28 Sep 2009 07:43
gnubeard wrote: > I'm baffled. How is creating my own implementation of a standard C > function reverse engineering, in any sense of the term? Or how is > loading said function with a standard ld feature reverse engineering? you found out how LW keeps track of the 5hr limit. that's reverse-engineering, because you had to analyse LW's functioning and operating to do so. -- Joost Kremers joostkremers(a)yahoo.com Selbst in die Unterwelt dringt durch Spalten Licht EN:SiS(9) |