Re: [Larceny-users] directory-files

Sven wrote: So, now I am using the following definition (I hope this one will live a little longer): (define call-with-input-pipe (lambda (command pred) (let* ((results (process (if (string? command) command (reduce-r (lambda (arg

Re: [Larceny-users] Object systems and macro transformers

TJ wrote: 1. Are there any object systems for Larceny? Preferably CLOS style systems. If not, how do I adapt tinyclos for use in Larceny? There are many object systems for Scheme, and some of them have been ported to Larceny. I'm not sure which ones are available or best supported, so I'll let

Re: [Larceny-users] Getting unix-era time in Larceny

David Rush wrote: I'm sure there is a straightforward way to get this that my incipient migraine is preventing me from finding. The closest I have seen so far appears to be the entry point osdep_cpuclock or possibly osdep_realclock down in the Rts innards. I can't see how either of these get

Re: [Larceny-users] more on read-dispatch-vec

Ed wrote: ; Symbol starters. (do ((c 128 (+ 1 c))) ((= c 256)) (vector-set! read-dispatch-vec c read-dispatch-symbol-starter)) (do ((i 0 (+ i 1))) ((= i 256)) (if (char-alphabetic? (integer-char i)) (vector-set!

Re: [Larceny-users] Update of libraries and syntax-case available

Thank you! Will ___ Larceny-users mailing list Larceny-users@lists.ccs.neu.edu https://lists.ccs.neu.edu/bin/listinfo/larceny-users

Re: [Larceny-users] Weak references

David Rush wrote: I'm pretty sure that both PLT and Gambit have weak-reference and/or object-finalization systems and I will try to take a look in the next few days to express a preference. Okay. In the meantime, I guess I will have to find out just how much memory I'm going to end up

[Larceny-users] an announcement from Abdulaziz Ghuloum

Abdulaziz Ghuloum has asked implementors to post the following announcement to their implementation-specific mailing lists. Ghuloum's announcement was first posted to comp.lang.scheme and to the R6RS discussion list. To avoid confusion, we need to add that Larceny v0.95 will be using Andre van

[Larceny-users] ANN: Larceny v0.95 First Safety

of ERR5RS. We appreciate Microsoft's support for projects that will use Common Larceny [5]. William D Clinger Felix S. Klock II [1] IEEE Standard for the Scheme Programming Language. IEEE Std 1178-1990. [2] Richard Kelsey, William Clinger, and Jonathan Rees [editors]. Revised^5

Re: [Larceny-users] command-line bug

Tom Gordon wrote: Is this the right channel for reporting Larceny bugs? Yes it is. Congratulations on the first bug report! In v.05, the R6RS command-line procedure should, I believe, return a list, not a vector. Thanks! I expect we'll post the obvious patch and workaround this weekend,

Re: [Larceny-users] confusing the lexer

Thanks, Jed. I have created a ticket for this. Will ___ Larceny-users mailing list Larceny-users@lists.ccs.neu.edu https://lists.ccs.neu.edu/bin/listinfo/larceny-users

Re: [Larceny-users] ERR5RS Default Record Printer

Ray Racine asked: Is (record-updater (record-type-descriptor thread-rtd) 'printer) ...) valid ERR5RS or shall it be considered as a Larceny and therefore non-portable extension? That's Larceny-specific and therefore non-portable. There are likely to be some implementations of ERR5RS that

Re: [Larceny-users] freezing for garbage collection?

David Rush wrote: Given that Larceny was originally meant to be a platform for trying various GC schemes (no pun intended) is it perhaps time to find a gifted student in need of a senior project to write a bounded-incremental collector? Last week, after giving a talk on that very problem for a

Re: [Larceny-users] freezing for garbage collection?

Matt Parker wrote: Will running the game in a thread work? No. I tried running it with your options and there were still pauses (less frequent, but just as large delays). That will be a problem with all of Larceny's current garbage collectors (and with other stop-the-world collectors,

Re: [Larceny-users] freezing for garbage collection?

Matt Parker wrote: I have been using chicken scheme already and it doesn't ever freeze the screen from garbage collection (I don't know why not). It also happens to be quite slow compared to larceny or even maybe gambit-c. I tried using gambit once and it did the same freezes. In that case,

Re: [Larceny-users] SRFIs in R6RS mode

In private correspondence with Ken Dickey, it seems he mainly wanted to know how to import some of Larceny's predefined R5RS procedures into an R6RS program. The lib/R6RS/larceny/records.sls file contains an example of the primitives syntax used to do this: (library (larceny records printer)

Re: [Larceny-users] Flush output port on r6rs script exit? + misc larceny questions

Ryan Newton wrote: It seems like Larceny doesn't flush output on exit from an R6RS script? That's news to me, but it sounds plausible. I'll look into it. I need process, and can get to it under normal larceny with (require 'unix). But I can't figure out how to get to it from within an R6

Re: [Larceny-users] Heaps in err5rs: giant heaps, errors loading, extra slow compile with -stopcopy

Ryan Newton wrote: I've got a large R6RS project. I'm having problems with compile- stale and also with trying to build my libraries incrementally using explicit dependencies represented in a makefile. (I can elaborate on that if anyone is curious.) Using compile-stale on Linux, I am able

Re: [Larceny-users] Larceny Runtime - SIGPIPE Handled?

Ray Racine wrote: My test case is pretty easy on my side, but I'm struggling for a simple test case for the Larceny developers to test cross O/S. I think we can proceed on the basis of what you've already given us. OTOH, we may have a SIGPIPE put Larceny in the debugger by default, just as a

Re: [Larceny-users] sqlite3 FFI

Pete wrote: I'm new to larceny and have chosen to use it for a project because it supports R6RS. How can I figure out what SRFIs are supported in R6RS mode (any?) That's easy: No SRFIs are supported in R6RS mode. SRFI 97 proposes a way to organize SRFIs as libraries that would be compatible

Re: [Larceny-users] stdout from larceny

Peter Keller wrote: Can turning on/off this stuff be put into a command line argument or environment variable? (And maybe have it defaulted to off?) The autoloading messages are suppressed for R6RS programs (but not for ERR5RS) in Larceny's current code base (but not in the v0.961 release of

Re: [Larceny-users] No binding available for rtd-accessor in library (rnrs conditions)

Martin Rodgers wrote: I successfully tested the following code with 3 other R6RS implementations, so I'm unhappy to report that Larceny complains about a missing binding. We, however, are happy you reported it. Thank you. You can fix this bug in your installation by adding one line to

Re: [Larceny-users] Typo in list.sch for assoc-string

Ray Racine wrote: I am on a roll today. :) Thanks, Ray. Those bugs are now tickets #552 and #553. Their fixes missed v0.962 by just a couple of days. Will ___ Larceny-users mailing list Larceny-users@lists.ccs.neu.edu

[Larceny-users] Larceny v0.962 now available for download

Larceny v0.962 is now available for download at http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/will/Larceny/ This release mostly just fixes bugs without adding many new features. Will ___ Larceny-users mailing list Larceny-users@lists.ccs.neu.edu

[Larceny-users] ANN: Larceny v0.963 Fluoridation (yet another bug fix release)

Matthew Flatt for making his excellent R6RS test program available to other implementors of the R6RS. William D Clinger Felix S. Klock II ___ Larceny-users mailing list Larceny-users@lists.ccs.neu.edu https://lists.ccs.neu.edu/bin/listinfo/larceny-users

[Larceny-users] ANN: Common Larceny v0.964 is now available

Common Larceny v0.964 is now available at http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/will/Larceny/ Common Larceny still lacks the ERR5RS and R6RS modes of native Larceny and Petit Larceny, but v0.964 adds compile-on-load and the v0.963 bug fixes to its R5RS mode. Will

Re: [Larceny-users] CommonLarceny 0.964

jeff bopp wrote: Hi guys, the download link to the new Common Larceny (0.964) seems to be broken. Indeed it was. I had forgotten to add the links. Fixed now. Thanks for telling us. Will ___ Larceny-users mailing list

Re: [Larceny-users] A very broken error message

David Rush wrote: The transcript below says it all. Yes, the macro is erroneous, but I made this mistake in the middle of a much larger macro definition, and well...cdr: () is not a pair just isn't very informative, although now that I know what went wrong I can see how it would arise. I

Re: [Larceny-users] Probably a daft question

David Rush wrote: But has anyone done a GTK+ set of bindings for Larceny yet? Felix Klock has prototyped this, but I don't know its current state. I'll let him fill in the details, but it will probably be a couple of days before he'll have time to respond. Will

[Larceny-users] Larceny v0.97b1 now available for beta testing

Larceny implements the most important 99.98% of the R6RS, but we will continue to make improvements. Thank you for your patience and support. William D Clinger Felix S. Klock II ___ Larceny-users mailing list Larceny-users@lists.ccs.neu.edu https

Re: [Larceny-users] Compiler - Intermediate Representation

Ray Racine wrote: Is there a way to dump out the compiler intermediate representation(s) from the various passes up to MacScheme IR for a given R6RS module? Yes, it should be possible to do this using the Twobit timing hook. lib/Experimental/twobit-timer.sch contains an example of its use, but

Re: [Larceny-users] fixnum math

Ray Racine noticed: fx math is unexpectedly slower. Yes. This is mentioned in the note at the end of Larceny User Manual section 8.11 [1]. Larceny's GreatPrimOpCleanUp [2] will improve matters by making the R6RS fx operations run at the same speed as the generic operations, but the R6RS fx

Re: [Larceny-users] recursive lists and C-c problems

Marco Maggi wrote: I am new to Larceny (10 minutes) taking a look at larceny-0.963-bin-native-ia32-linux86) v0.97b1 is newer and should have fewer bugs. and I see that this script goes into an endless loop: (import (rnrs) (rnrs mutable-pairs (6))) (write (let ((v '(1 #f)))

Re: [Larceny-users] recursive lists and C-c problems

Marco Maggi wrote: v0.97b1 is newer and should have fewer bugs. Is it also still open to very small non-language related changes? Yes. Fine. But is there a switch that makes larceny print some non-infinite output in R6RS-compatible-mode-for-everything-else? No, but there should be. I'm

Re: [Larceny-users] finding libraries

Marco Moggie wrote: Of course I can write a shell script that makes use of an environment variable to build the -path argument, but... make it simple! You could, for example, edit the startup.sch file documented in sections 3.2.4 of Larceny's User Manual. If you prefer to use an environment

Re: [Larceny-users] recursive lists and C-c problems

David Van Horn wrote: Are you just waiting for SRFI 97 to go final? I have also been waiting for the end of the semester so I'd have time to work on v0.97 again. With the end of the semester upon us, I'm just waiting to see whether there will be any further changes to SRFI 97 before I start to

Re: [Larceny-users] ANF size error with 0.97b1

Marco Maggi (and I hope I typed it right this time!) wrote: Is it something to report as a bug? The ANF size: reports come from the compiler, and provide an estimate of the code size. Those messages were added to help us track down some performance bugs in compiler optimization. They shouldn't

Re: [Larceny-users] finding libraries

Jon Wells wrote: Has there ever been any discussion of allowing import clauses to appear anywhere other than the toplevel... Yes, there has been some discussion. However... So one could... (import (rnrs)) : (if some-arbitrary-condition (import (a guff))

Re: [Larceny-users] ANF size error with 0.97b1

Marco Moggi wrote: I have NOT tried to precompile the libraries. Since the ANF size: messages are coming from the compiler, precompiling the libraries would eliminate those messages from the run-time output. Will ___ Larceny-users mailing list

Re: [Larceny-users] Probably not a bug in R6RS, but...

David Rush wrote: Should I report this as a bug? I don't think you need to file a bug ticket. The use of \ as an escape character within symbols is not a legal R5RS, ERR5RS, or R6RS syntax, and is already deprecated (see the read-traditional-weirdness? parameter [1]). If this is considered to

Re: [Larceny-users] error compiling cons form

Ticket #600 is fixed as of changeset:5880. I didn't realize that Felix was working on the problem, so I tracked it down independently. Will ___ Larceny-users mailing list Larceny-users@lists.ccs.neu.edu

Re: [Larceny-users] on porting to larceny

Marco Moggi wrote: The built in PARAMETERIZE does not act as a LETREC-like form: That has been logged as a requested enhancement (ticket #601). If I have not missed it in the source, the FFI does not implement peekers and pokers for long double and long long. They are unusual, but if the

Re: [Larceny-users] Re

Marco Maggi wrote: So setting errno is a mandatory feature. As of revision 5884, get-errno and set-errno! are present in Larceny's R5RS mode and can be imported into ERR5RS and R6RS modes using the primitives extension. Will ___ Larceny-users mailing

Re: [Larceny-users] assertion failure in stats_start_timer

Marco Maggi wrote: When running my test suite for POSIX functions, I get an assertion failure on Sys/stats.c line 283. Logged as ticket #604: https://trac.ccs.neu.edu/trac/larceny/ticket/604 Should be fixed by changeset:5889. Please let us know if that fixes it, so we can close the

Re: [Larceny-users] srfi-19 testing and larceny-5889 errors

Marco Maggi wrote a test program... which shows errors when loading (srfi :19) from Larceny into Larceny-5889. I have fixed a few bugs in Larceny's implementation of (srfi :19 time). Most of these were bugs in the reference implementation. (It is unclear to me whether the nanosecond argument

Re: [Larceny-users] GLUT and GL bindings ported from Ypsilon

Eduardo Cavazos wrote: I ported the gl and glut FFI bindings which come with Ypsilon to Larceny Very nice! Thank you! Will ___ Larceny-users mailing list Larceny-users@lists.ccs.neu.edu https://lists.ccs.neu.edu/bin/listinfo/larceny-users

Re: [Larceny-users] library form for gl.scm

Eduardo Cavazos wrote: If I load it via either one of these: ~ # larceny -- /scratch/_gl-test-case-a.scm ~ # larceny -err5rs -- /scratch/_gl-test-case-a.scm I get this error: ERROR detected during macro expansion: Definition out of context (define libGL (foreign-file libGL.so.1))

Re: [Larceny-users] err5rs and srfis

Ed Cavazos wrote: Is there a way to load srfi 27 while in err5rs mode? In the current development system, you'd import (srfi :27 random-bits), and that's how you'll import it when v0.97 is released. We expect v0.97 will provide most of the libraries listed in SRFI 97. That doesn't work in

Re: [Larceny-users] profiling code

Eduardo Cavazos wrote: I'm interested in finding out where *my* code is spending all it's time. :-) Is there a profiler for Larceny? Yes, but it has very crude resolution. In R5RS mode: (require 'profile) #t (run-with-profiling (lambda () (let* ((x1 (vector-list

Re: [Larceny-users] profiling spirales

Eduardo Cavazos wrote: So what do the numbers mean? There are two tables which are output each time. Roughly speaking, the first table shows the percentage of time each procedure is executing its own code. The second table shows the percentage of time each procedure is executing its own code

Re: [Larceny-users] make-bytevector and bytevector-copy

Ed wrote: So my question is, is the first version of 'get-modelview-matrix' shown above inherently hot? Maybe. The other possibilities are that (glGetDoublev GL_MODELVIEW_MATRIX bv) takes a long time or that the profiler is overcounting calls to foreign procedures for some reason. In any

Re: [Larceny-users] using srfi 27 and some other issues

Marijn Schouten wrote: I've been working on packaging larceny 0.97b1 for Gentoo, partly because I wanted to try it out on a small physics simulation project that I'm working on. I'd like to detail some of the difficulties I ran into. Thank you for reporting these things to us. in

Re: [Larceny-users] missing SRFI-43 (vector library)

Marijn wrote: it seems that SRFI-43 (vector library) is not (yet) supported. I'd really like to use it. Are there any plans for adding it? I spent part of Friday writing tests for SRFI 43, which uncovered a previously unreported bug in the reference implementation. When I have fixed that bug,

Re: [Larceny-users] running fasl's

In my previous message, I said SRFI 19 twice when I meant SRFI 27. (I modified Larceny's implementations of both SRFIs within the last few days, and got them confused.) Will ___ Larceny-users mailing list Larceny-users@lists.ccs.neu.edu

Re: [Larceny-users] running fasl's

As of revision:6120, Larceny's implementation of random-integer from SRFI 27 is considerably faster than before. If that has been holding you back, you might want to replace the old versions of lib/SRFI/srfi-27.sch and lib/SRFI/srfi/%3a27.sls with the new ones relative to

Re: [Larceny-users] procedure introspection

Jose A Ortega Ruiz (jao) wrote: Unless procedure-arity is extended to provide them, i'd be using procedure-expression to get the arguments' *names*, to display short help notices in emacs echo area (using eldoc). Larceny already retains the variable names, but we never extended

Re: [Larceny-users] incremental development in ERR5RS/larceny

Jose A Ortega Ruiz (jao) wrote: Now, i'm wondering to what extent such an interactive way of hacking is possible in ERR5RS and, in particular, its Larceny incarnation (R6RS being out of the question since it ditchs the REPL). If i'm understanding things correctly, the ERR5RS equivalent of,

Re: [Larceny-users] turning on optimizations

Marijn wrote: Am I doing it wrong or is there something that is just not implemented yet here? Larceny's benchmark-block-mode doesn't work, and hasn't for some time. The incremental compiler just ignores that switch, but compile-file reports the error you encountered if that switch is turned

Re: [Larceny-users] turning on optimizations

Marijn wrote: Do you really mean init-sample here? My mistake! I was confused by a defect in the profiler. My transformation of your code (to mimic block compilation) turned your entire program into an anonymous closure, which (being nameless) would never show up in the profiler! The loop1 I

Re: [Larceny-users] Syntax violations need syntax

Logged as ticket #622. Fixed by changeset:6150. Thanks! Will ___ Larceny-users mailing list Larceny-users@lists.ccs.neu.edu https://lists.ccs.neu.edu/bin/listinfo/larceny-users

Re: [Larceny-users] first steps with Larceny

Michele Simionato wrote: It seems anyway that sweet-macros do not work out of the box with Larceny (some error Too many ...'s). I will try to nail the issue down to a simple test case. Thanks to you and Derick for that bug report. It has been logged as ticket #637. FWIW, so far,

Re: [Larceny-users] first steps with Larceny

Concerning the syntax bug (ticket #637 [1]), I wrote: This bug is Larceny-specific. Andre van Tonder's macro expander is not at fault. I think I was wrong about that. I have checked in a possible fix that passes all my tests but may still not be right. Please let me know of any more bugs you

Re: [Larceny-users] compiling using the twobit heap

Dimitris Vardoulakis wrote: which file in the source code shows what happens when I type a definition in the repl? src/Asm/Shared/link-lop.sch Apparently the link-lop-segment procedure is not available at top level in the twobit heap. If you want to use it yourself, I think the best way to

Re: [Larceny-users] [plt-scheme] Re: side effects in R6RS modules

Matthias Felleisen wrote: For whatever reasons, the editors moved the only piece of mathematics semantics (which doesn't include modules and macros) to the appendix, for reasons that still escape me. Well, they don't really. If you don't have a tool for arbitrating two distinct interpretations

Re: [Larceny-users] [plt-scheme] Re: side effects in R6RS modules

Matthias Felleisen wrote: You'd be surprised. I have read those 'formal comments'; I just don't think they contain any reasons to downgrade the formal semantics into an optional appendix. Not one. Not a single one. Well, no one ever said the R6RS was perfect. Will

Re: [Larceny-users] Evaluate expr at startup does not work for import

Marijn Schouten wrote: I noticed that it doesn't seem to work when you try to import at startup. In Larceny, all code that is evaluated using the -e command-line option must be written in R5 Scheme. That allows you to load R5RS code at startup, even if the mode is ERR5RS. I suppose we could add

[Larceny-users] ANN: Larceny v0.97 Funny in the Head

libraries and SRFI libraries. We thank Dave Herman for improving Larceny's web site. William D Clinger Felix S Klock II ___ Larceny-users mailing list Larceny-users@lists.ccs.neu.edu https://lists.ccs.neu.edu/bin/listinfo/larceny-users

Re: [Larceny-users] Bug in syntax-rules expander (R6RS semantics changed?)

One can always get the effect specified by R5RS by wrapping a (let () ...) around the (let-syntax ...), which could itself be specified as a separate syntax-rules macro. Good point. I'll log this as a bug, and think about the backwards compatibility issues some more. Will

Re: [Larceny-users] Importing (srfi :19 time)

But, notice the warnings. Did you get those? Yes. That might be related to dynamic recompilation by the FFI, but I'll have to check. Will ___ Larceny-users mailing list Larceny-users@lists.ccs.neu.edu

Re: [Larceny-users] Performance Of SHA-256 Implementation

Ray Racine wrote: The answer is correct, however, the 1 sec calculation time is a bit longer than anticipated along with the 4 million allocated words. I understand why bitwise manipulations are going to be slower in dynamically typed language with type tag bits. Thought I'd toss it out in

[Larceny-users] ratification vote for R7RS-small

The Scheme Language Steering Committee (SLSC) has announced a vote on whether the ninth draft R7RS produced by Working Group 1 should be endorsed by the SLSC. Votes are due by the end of Sunday, May 13, 2013. For full instructions on how to vote, with explanation of what the vote is about,

Re: [Larceny-users] Larceny Panic: Can't allocate an object of size ...

Sven Hartrumpf wrote: > Is there a way to avoid the following compiler crash? Sorry about that. In my experience, this error means Larceny's assembler tried to create a single monolithic chunk of x86 machine code whose size was the reported 17536520 bytes, which is larger than the maximum

Re: [Larceny-users] user-defined features for cond-expand

Sven Hartrumpf wrote: > Many Scheme implementations allow to define a feature for cond-expand, e.g. > in Chicken, -feature mydebug > in Bigloo, -srfimydebug > etc. > > How to do this when compiling with Larceny (R7RS)? That's a good idea, but Larceny doesn't support it. I'll add that as a

Re: [Larceny-users] cyclic library dependency

Alex Shinn wrote: > Where does R6RS state it forbids cyclic libraries? That's a consequence of R6RS Section 7.3, and is stated a bit more directly in the (never-ratified) R6RS Rationale Section 7. What I'm about to quote is easier to understand if you recall that, in the absence of macros, all

Re: [Larceny-users] understanding compiler messages

Sven Hartrumpf wrote: > I am porting a large R5RS program to R7RS, module by module. > But I am stuck at the following cryptic message: > > > rlwrap larceny -r7rsc > Larceny v0.98+ "General Ripper" (Jan 12 2016 13:24:38, precise:Linux:unified) > larceny.heap, built on Di 12. Jan 13:27:54 CET

Re: [Larceny-users] understanding compiler messages

Sven, I pushed a fix for bug #740 that will probably fix the module/macro expander problem you encountered. Please try it and let me know. Will ___ Larceny-users mailing list Larceny-users@lists.ccs.neu.edu

Re: [Larceny-users] ANF size greater than 80000

Sven Hartrumpf wrote: > When compiling large programs, I see the following warning: > "ANF size greater than 8 > Some global optimizations were not performed." > > How important are these optimizations for the speed of resulting .slfasl > files? Those optimizations range from having hardly

Re: [Larceny-users] open-input-file "unable to open file" on 8GB file

David Rush wrote: > I'm running larceny 0.98, for which I have written a number of logfile > analysis programs, but I can't seem to get started on my latest (and > largest) log file. I was not aware of this problem, but Sven Hartrumpf's response is correct: Larceny is unable to create or to read

Re: [Larceny-users] Error on trying to get started

Russell Wallace wrote: > I've downloaded larceny on Windows and I'm trying to use it to run a > minimal test script, like (print 42). When I run larceny.bat without > arguments I get a repl, but when I run it with test.scm as an argument, I > get 'error: deprecated heap file syntax'. What am I

Re: [Larceny-users] HOWTO procedure-name-set! ?

Ken Dickey wrote: > I am using R7 code but also procedure-name-set! which has just become > unavailabel with -r7r6. > > Is there a 'lenient option? > > Can I do an (import (cruft ..)) ? Yes. (import (primitives procname ...)) will import procname ... from Larceny's underlying R5RS layer. >

[Larceny-users] Larceny v0.99a1 available for alpha/beta testing

Larceny v0.99 will be released in a couple of weeks. It will fix bugs, improve R7RS conformance, and add several new SRFI libraries while upgrading others. Version 0.99a1 is available for downloading and alpha/beta testing from our nightly build page: http://larceny.ccs.neu.edu/nightly/ Its core

Re: [Larceny-users] apropos for Larceny

KenD quoting Lars T Hansen: > > There's also an apropos function already. Try (require 'apropos) to load > > it. > > > > --lars > > Thanks. I missed that. > > Er, how does one import that with/into -r7rs mode? Like this: > (import (primitives r5rs:require)) > (r5rs:require 'apropos) #t >

Re: [Larceny-users] library name clashes in larceny with the -r7rs -program options

John Bignucolo wrote: > I ran into a problem when I tried to change the program to use the > string-join function from SRFI-13. > > The '-r7rs' '-program' options require that you import everything you need. > Since string-join is part of SRFI-13 I thought all I needed to do was: > > (import

[Larceny-users] v1.3 release candidate

The nightly builds available this morning (for Linux and macOS only) are candidates for a release of Larceny v1.3 late next week. Please let us know of any problems you discover. Nightly build page: http://www.cesura17.net/%7Elarcenists/Nightly/ Nightly build of user manual:

Re: [Larceny-users] ARM Chromebook build progress (Ubuntu via Crouton; Acer Chromebook 13)

Ken Dickey encountered the following error during a build from source that appears to have been unpacked from larceny-0.99-src.tar.gz : --> Error: unhandled condition: Compound condition has these components: # # who : compile-library # message : "contains non-library code" #

Re: [Larceny-users] Larceny-users Digest, Vol 70, Issue 1

Thank you for testing the release candidate. I apologize for being so slow to respond. I've been on vacation and away from the Internet for a week. "KenD" wrote: > There appears to be a difference in R6 environments running in -r7rs mode > between the x86 and ARM