* Peter Bex [140317 21:38]:
> Hi all,
>
> The attached patch fixes the problem from subject, as described here:
> http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/chicken-users/2014-03/msg00088.html
>
> It also cleans up the code a little bit by re-using well-named C
> functions instead of repeating the sam
On Mar 17, 2014, at 1:38 PM, Peter Bex wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The attached patch fixes the problem from subject, as described here:
> http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/chicken-users/2014-03/msg00088.html
>
> It also cleans up the code a little bit by re-using well-named C
> functions instead
Hi all,
The attached patch fixes the problem from subject, as described here:
http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/chicken-users/2014-03/msg00088.html
It also cleans up the code a little bit by re-using well-named C
functions instead of repeating the same inline and C preprocessor-heavy
checks wh