Updated version, incorporating the suggestions from this thread:
http://divmod.org/users/moe/chicken3.png
Not sure about the blue.
___
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-users@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
Hello,
The network which connects chicken.wiki.br (aka galinha.ucpel.tche.br)
to the Internet had some problems today and we had a long period of
downtime.
I apologize for the inconvenience.
Best wishes,
Mario
___
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-
On 12/14/06, Brandon J. Van Every <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(cut)
Still say the "y" in the body interior needs to go.
Like this?
(this is just an example - I don't know how to paint :) )
Regards.
--
http://arhuaco.org
http://emQbit.com
chicken2.png
Description: PNG image
This version is pretty good. I agree with Brandon that the "y"
must go.
-Ivan
"Brandon J. Van Every" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Moe Aboulkheir wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:12:20 -0500, Ivan Raikov
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>> I take it you are not the same "elf
Moe Aboulkheir wrote:
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 23:54:55 +0200, Moe Aboulkheir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:12:20 -0500, Ivan Raikov
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I take it you are not the same "elf" who designed the Emacs Gnus
logo? Because I think that this new Chicken lo
Moe Aboulkheir wrote:
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:12:20 -0500, Ivan Raikov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I take it you are not the same "elf" who designed the Emacs Gnus
logo? Because I think that this new Chicken logo can be simplified
greatly, along the lines of the Emacs Gnus logo:
http://www.
Hi,
I'm still waiting for a comment from felix about read-line not using
read-string.
In the meanwhile, I'm fixing the ssax egg to use ##sys#read-char-0
like the following.
Index: ssax-core.scm
===
--- ssax-core.scm (revision
John Cowan wrote:
Brandon J. Van Every scripsit:
I've never cared about contract programming, because I'm too saddled
with performance concerns to worry about that.
"If it doesn't have to work, I can make it as fast as you want."
At DEC we always ran OpenGL Conformance suites, an
Matthew David Parker wrote:
Alright I got it working in msys. I had to install it to c:\Program
Files\Chicken using CMake and then make sure that it was in my msys PATH,
which it was by default, and then I deleted the previous ones I
had installed in /local/bin. Now it runs well, but unfortunate
Peter Bex wrote:
On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 05:59:23AM -0800, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
I don't really understand this part.
The point is, you can use LGPL code as "starter code," and
incrementally transform it, until you have only BSD code. The
incrementality i
Peter Bex wrote:
On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 04:45:11AM -0800, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
Some tests need additional code for support (setting
things up in a particular way etc). Why would one want to put all that
code (which may be twice as big as the code itself, or even bigger, if done
pro
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 23:54:55 +0200, Moe Aboulkheir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:12:20 -0500, Ivan Raikov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I take it you are not the same "elf" who designed the Emacs Gnus
logo? Because I think that this new Chicken logo can be simplified
gre
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:12:20 -0500, Ivan Raikov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I take it you are not the same "elf" who designed the Emacs Gnus
logo? Because I think that this new Chicken logo can be simplified
greatly, along the lines of the Emacs Gnus logo:
http://www.ee.ryerson.ca/~elf/emacs
heh, no, im definitely not the same elf. i use vi, for one. :)
-elf
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Ivan Raikov wrote:
>
> I take it you are not the same "elf" who designed the Emacs Gnus
> logo? Because I think that this new Chicken logo can be simplified
> greatly, along the lines of the Emacs Gnus
On Dec 14, 2006, at 1:51 AM, felix winkelmann wrote:
Hi!
While reading a bit about "doctest" (the Python utility), I thought
it would be relatively easy to support embedded documentation
in definitions, like:
(define (foo ...)
'(test (...))
...)
The basic idea is to extend the idea of Lisp/
Alright I got it working in msys. I had to install it to c:\Program
Files\Chicken using CMake and then make sure that it was in my msys PATH,
which it was by default, and then I deleted the previous ones I
had installed in /local/bin. Now it runs well, but unfortunately I think
MSYS pipes stdout
On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 05:59:23AM -0800, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
>
> I don't really understand this part.
>
>The point is, you can use LGPL code as "starter code," and
>incrementally transform it, until you have only BSD code. The
>incrementality is importa
I take it you are not the same "elf" who designed the Emacs Gnus
logo? Because I think that this new Chicken logo can be simplified
greatly, along the lines of the Emacs Gnus logo:
http://www.ee.ryerson.ca/~elf/emacs/logo/logo2.html
elf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> wasnt actually me, it wa
machine: solaris with SunOS
chicken version: 2.5
In the shell,
export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=the_path_to_chicken_lib:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH
and invoking csi
#;1> (use regex)
; loading library regex ...
--- this is fine.
However, I then invoked xemacs and did the following:
(require 'cmus
Brandon J. Van Every scripsit:
> I've never cared about contract programming, because I'm too saddled
> with performance concerns to worry about that.
"If it doesn't have to work, I can make it as fast as you want."
> Oops. The problem, in my point of view, is that you Unix guys are
> always se
Peter Bex wrote:
On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 03:10:28AM -0800, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
Of course, LGPL code can be gradually "whittled down," taking on more
and more functionality in either toplevel or parallel libraries, so long
as you're writing your own code and not cutting and pasting t
On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 03:10:28AM -0800, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> Bear in mind that PLT Scheme is LGPLed, as is the mzlib containing
> contracts.ss.
> http://download.plt-scheme.org/doc/mzlib/mzlib-Z-H-54.html#node_chap_Temp_9
> That means it could only be snarfed as an egg.
True, but that
On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 12:13:19PM +0100, Peter Busser wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I have no ideas for the exact mechanism or the syntax. But I like the
> idea of having test cases embedded in the code. That makes proper
> maintenance of the test cases more likely IMHO.
You're not worried about the prolifer
Hi!
> It's no big deal to extend the compiler to extract this info. What I'm
> looking for is ideas about the exact mechanism, the syntax, etc.
>
> Pointless or useful?
I have no ideas for the exact mechanism or the syntax. But I like the
idea of having test cases embedded in the code. That make
On 12/14/06, felix winkelmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi!
While reading a bit about "doctest" (the Python utility), I thought
it would be relatively easy to support embedded documentation
in definitions, like:
(define (foo ...)
'(test (...))
...)
The basic idea is to extend the idea of
On 12/14/06, Peter Bex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It might be useful, but typically tests are much bigger than a single
sexpr. If you really want to test a function well, you'll have to
write tests around all the corner cases and weird combinations.
How bigger a function is, the more tests you'
wasnt actually me, it was my gf sarah, a librarian and graphic artist and
novice programmer who im teaching using chicken :)
-elf
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, felix winkelmann wrote:
> Hi, everybody!
>
>
> Here a few cool chicken logos:
>
> http://www.call-with-current-continuation.org/schemechicken.p
On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 10:51:46AM +0100, felix winkelmann wrote:
> Hi!
>
> While reading a bit about "doctest" (the Python utility), I thought
> it would be relatively easy to support embedded documentation
> in definitions, like:
>
> (define (foo ...)
> '(test (...))
> ...)
>
> The basic i
Hi, everybody!
Here a few cool chicken logos:
http://www.call-with-current-continuation.org/schemechicken.png
http://www.call-with-current-continuation.org/schemechickenwithtitle.png
(Courtesy of elf - thanks!)
What do you think?
cheers,
felix
_
do it the lisp way, perhaps?
(define (foo ...) "docstring" body ...)
(define foo (lambda (...) "docstring" body ...))
?
or, more generally (if the compiler runs a pass to change the first form
into the second)
(lambda (lambda-list) "docstring" body ...)
which would also allow generic lambdas t
Hi!
While reading a bit about "doctest" (the Python utility), I thought
it would be relatively easy to support embedded documentation
in definitions, like:
(define (foo ...)
'(test (...))
...)
The basic idea is to extend the idea of Lisp/Scheme docstrings
(a string as the first form inside a
31 matches
Mail list logo
