Arc Forumnew | comments | leaders | submitlogin
1 point by waterhouse 3314 days ago | link | parent

That is a known issue with Windows. (I'm guessing it's the reason arc3 is still the "official" version on the install page.) Simple workaround[1]: Find the line that says:

  (define setuid (get-ffi-obj 'setuid #f (_fun _int -> _int)))
and replace it with

  (define (setuid x) x)
I have done this on at least two Windows computers and Arc ran fine afterwards.


1 point by prestonbriggs 3313 days ago | link

Got it, thanks.


2 points by ylando 3312 days ago | link

Why arc do not have a normal web page; See:


2 points by akkartik 3312 days ago | link

Because it's unfinished (and may remain so). See and more recently No point sucking people in with a normal-looking webpage if the language isn't really ready for production use.


1 point by evanrmurphy 3310 days ago | link

Could you talk about your decision to use it for Readwarp then? If Arc's not really ready for production use, might it still be a good choice for a certain minority of developers?


2 points by akkartik 3310 days ago | link

Yeah, I'm not trying to say you shouldn't use it for production use :)

They're opposing perspectives. As a user of arc I'd throw it into production[1]. At the same time, from PG's perspective I'd want to be conservative about calling it production ready.

I suspect arc will never go out of 'alpha' no matter how mature it gets, just because PG and RTM will not enjoy having to provide support, or having to maintain compatibility.

[1] With some caveats: treat it as a white box, be prepared to hack on its innards, be prepared to dive into scheme and the FFI. And if you're saving state in flat files, be prepared for pain when going from 1 servers to 2.

Not all kinds of production are made the same.