Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Remove deprecations
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 11:55:46PM +0200, Felix wrote: Here's a patch that gets rid of all the things that were deprecated in 4.8.0. Some of the things were a little tricky - for example, there were several macros that were plain lambdas that didn't make use of a macro transformer wrapper. It turns out the notes I put with the string-number stuff were also incorrect, so I fixed it the right way :) Note that we have to keep deprecated stuff for a while. It seems that people often keep relatively old chickens around and it is truly annoying having to work around a dropped compiler option or primitive. It would be best to sort out exactly when these things were deprecated (I can do that, if you want). We should try to mark deprecations with a timestamp in the future - it would have made things easier now. I thought kept stuff deprecated for one release and removed it the next. When will we be able to remove this stuff? Cheers, Peter -- http://sjamaan.ath.cx -- The process of preparing programs for a digital computer is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic experience much like composing poetry or music. -- Donald Knuth ___ Chicken-hackers mailing list Chicken-hackers@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers
Re: [Chicken-hackers] will we have a release this year?
Hi, The environments egg will not work under Chicken 4.7.4 and later, due to changes in the internal representation (also noted in the documentation). The rewrite branch is meant to fix this issue. This was an error from the rewrite branch. We were wondering whether an internal error such as the one reported would be from chicken or the egg. Regards, @ndy -- andy...@ashurst.eu.org http://www.ashurst.eu.org/ 0x7EBA75FF ___ Chicken-hackers mailing list Chicken-hackers@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] show current keyword style in csi's , r command
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 12:01:45AM +0200, Felix wrote: The patch makes ,r in csi show the currently active keyword style. Very useful, thanks (I didn't even know about ,r)! Pushed. Cheers, Peter -- http://sjamaan.ath.cx -- The process of preparing programs for a digital computer is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic experience much like composing poetry or music. -- Donald Knuth ___ Chicken-hackers mailing list Chicken-hackers@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] use more primitive operations in compiler-syntax for formatted output
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 11:58:05PM +0200, Felix wrote: The compiler-syntax for [sf]printf can be made slightly more efficient by adding a port-check at the beginning and use unsafe output-primitives where possible. Thanks, pushed. Cheers, Peter -- http://sjamaan.ath.cx -- The process of preparing programs for a digital computer is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic experience much like composing poetry or music. -- Donald Knuth ___ Chicken-hackers mailing list Chicken-hackers@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Remove deprecations
Note that we have to keep deprecated stuff for a while. It seems that people often keep relatively old chickens around and it is truly annoying having to work around a dropped compiler option or primitive. It would be best to sort out exactly when these things were deprecated (I can do that, if you want). We should try to mark deprecations with a timestamp in the future - it would have made things easier now. I thought kept stuff deprecated for one release and removed it the next. When will we be able to remove this stuff? Yes, you are of course totally right. I'm just a bit reluctant to remove what might still be used somewhere. We all know how it is when things break suddenly, just because an egg or the base system has been updated. The longer something is kept, the lower is the chance of breakage. I just think we should decide on a case by case basis, whether something is truly ancient, or whether it was still in use in compiled code, whether something just hurts in the eye and has to go, or wether it is obscure enough to be left in or a while. cheers, felix ___ Chicken-hackers mailing list Chicken-hackers@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Remove deprecations
I sort of agree with your point in that post, but if there's no way to see that you're still relying on deprecated things it will be harder to fix your program once you upgrade; it'll just break down. Yes, we do not disagree here. Patches pushed. cheers, felix ___ Chicken-hackers mailing list Chicken-hackers@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers
