| GresP | So I get control but things are still hanging there in memory, even queries continue to run |
| Modius | Yikes |
| GresP | Yes, it was with Java, about 1.5 yrs ago. In the end I we dumped the MS SQL server drivers and went for a third party one Is there any path to use a native route, rather than through ODBC? |
| Modius | Call into dotnet through RDNZL - it'll be a pain :( |
| jeffz | or use the jdbc drivers through foil or something |
| Modius | I'll use the dotnet ones as I know they work |
| GresP | Yeah, I've previously leapt through hoops to avoid the odbc layer. |
| Modius | Grr - yep, looks like I'm calling into the dotnet |
| GresP | I seem to remember doing something weird like linking in the tables to an MS Access database using the native SQL Server drivers, then using ODBC to connect to the access database. The Jet drivers seemed to iron out a lot of wrinkles ... probably not what you want for production though!! Anyone have any idea what I'm doing wrong ... I load a package using (asdf:oos 'asdf:load-op :testit) (use-package :testit) (in-package :cl-user), everytime I compile under slime I have to resolve conflicts. How do I avoid that? |
| Zhivago | what kind of conflicts? |
| msingh | in a profile report under slime - what units are the entries under "Total Cons" - bytes or cons? |
| lukego | most probably bytes, but it may depend on which lisp you're using |
| msingh | ok thanks |
| manic | what's the sub topic? |
| rkrush | Hmm, if anyone is familiar with hunchentoot, what should be the request argument to DEFAULT-DISPATCHER be? hunchetoot:*request* seems to be unbound for whatever reason. Nevermind |
| GresP | It was symbol conflicts in cl-users. It seems I needed to do the in-package before use-package. Seems have solved it. |
| manic | anybody home? |
| Dazhbog | how can I use a macro (which generates a defun) in a loop? |
| manic | what do you mean, you want to make a bunch of defuns? |
| Dazhbog | yes e.g. from a list |
| manic | `(progn ,@(loop for form in forms collect form)) kinda like ,@body i guess, but you would do some logic on em i suppose |
| Dazhbog | heh, that crossed my mind but somehow I thought the defuns can't be inside a progn |
| manic | really? naw |
| Dazhbog | I'll do it that way .. thank you =) I don't know if it's wise to generate defuns but I'm doing something quick'n'dirty way |
| manic | i generate defmethods i mean, you can always use the functional interface (setf (symbol-function function-name) #'(lambda (foo) foo)) it's either that or fdefinition, i'm getting tired then (compile 'function-name) |
| Dazhbog | I see =) |
| manic | my lisp is doing some computations right now so i am going on strained memory once you figure out common lisp you figure out that you'll never figure it out |
| Dazhbog | great .. this works now |
| manic | which way, the macro, or the setf? |
| Dazhbog | the macro |