On Wednesday 30 November 2005 06:44 am, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Bruce Korb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Because the file is mostly *NOT* scheme. > > I did say that you could use "Scheme constructs", "be it from Scheme > o[r] C code". In other words, you can either write `(read)' in a piece > of Scheme code, or call `scm_read ()' from your C code: both are > strictly equivalent (well, almost). > > The point is: do not rewrite what already exists because *this* is hard > to maintain. > > Actually, what you want is `primitive-load' + `read' (which handles > piggy-backing of source location information as I said). It is true, > however, that `primitive-load' (or, rather, `open-input-file') is not > guaranteed to use `mmap ()' the way you do it currently[*]. So if you > do want to make sure that the input file is `mmap'd the way you like, > then you may want to write your own variant of `primitive-load' (see > `libguile/load.c'). > > In any case, I can hardly imagine how Guile itself could be more helpful > than this. ;-)
Hi, I am completely certain that this makes sense to you. To me, it does not. If I call ``scm_read(port)'' I have to attach the input file as a port. That read function reads an s-expr. How can that work if the non-Scheme text in the file is not an s-expr? I don't see another function for getting text from a port. Am I missing something? Especially troubling is the phrase, "Any whitespace before the next token is discarded." I do not want tokenized input. I want raw text. I have my own methods for determining when something needs a Scheme evaluation. I will certainly have a more authoritative idea about what is discardable white space and what is not. Here, take a look at an example template file: http://autogen.sourceforge.net/doc/autogen_3.html#SEC3 It is about halfway down, after the phrase "It looks something like this". Oh, here it is anyway, but there is some discussion describing it on that page: [+ AutoGen5 template h c +] [+ CASE (suffix) +][+ == h +] typedef enum {[+ FOR list "," +] IDX_[+ (string-upcase! (get "list_element")) +][+ ENDFOR list +] } list_enum; extern const char* az_name_list[ [+ (count "list") +] ]; [+ == c +] #include "list.h" const char* az_name_list[] = {[+ FOR list "," +] "[+list_info+]"[+ ENDFOR list +] };[+ ESAC +] That example text contains 3 scheme phrases to be evaluated by Guile: (suffix) (string-upcase! (get "list_element")) (count "list") "get", "count" and "suffix" are my own functions defined in other ways. The file name should be "list.tpl" in all cases and the line numbers be 2, 6 and 9 respectively. Everything else is handled by my program. So, I can hardly imagine how Guile would be able to do what you say it can. Likely, I am just missing something, but nevertheless, it is escaping me. BTW, the expression on line 6 gets evaluated three times. Each time, ``(get "list_element")'' returns a different value. Likewise, ``(suffix)'' is evaluated twice and returns "h" the first time and "c" the second time. Sorry to be such a bother. Thanks - Bruce _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel