On 5/15/07, Peter Keller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Doesn't chicken already have a tool someon can run when linking with
chicken applications? Like csc -libs? Why can't you just add -lpcre there
if applicable? Then it'll just grab whatever the user wanted.
Wouldn't that cause versioning probl
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 08:36:20AM +0200, felix winkelmann wrote:
> Indeed. My experience has been quite the opoosite. There are situations
> where
> static linking may give problems, but there are vastly more with dynamic
> linking.
I suspect if in the future I run into those problems that you h
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 01:51:20AM -0400, Brandon Van Every wrote:
> This resembles the case of PCRE. We have our own code for this library. To
> create a dynamic libchicken, first we create a static libpcre. The static
> libpcre is compiled with shared flags, so that the .obj files are correct
On 5/14/07, Peter Keller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So, the summary of my argument is that out of all linking problems, both
static and dynamic, 80% of them would be related to static linking, 20%
of them would be related to dynamic linking. This is purely anecdotal
from my previous experiences
On 5/14/07, John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
IMHO it is not worth working so hard to get this corner case correct;
you will end up reimplementing half of Cygwin.
I sympathize(?) with this point of view. Adding lots of special cases
will not make the code any easier to maintain (look at cs
On 5/14/07, Kon Lovett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Yes, that's the sort of thing. I think the test-cases should
> ultimately end up Chicken's source repository -- or the eggs
> repository, for modules -- so that they can be performed after a build
> if desired. But a Web-based tool (wiki or ot
On 5/14/07, Peter Keller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Example 1
-
1. You statically link the openssl libraries into your application because
you can't guarantee that the target platform will have one. So, you move
your executable to a machine, start it up, and here is what could happen
Hi all,
I have created several eggs that together comprise an alternative
to the rgraph egg. I believe my implementation is somewhat more
modular and as a consequence provides a simpler interface. I have also
included an implementation of BFS, which was lacking in rgraph when I
checked last.
On 5/14/07, Peter Keller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dynamic libraries were created to solve upgradability and text size in the
VM problems. However, they do have some nasty edge cases. Truth be told,
you probably won't hit any of them unless you A) want multiple revisions
of a tool coeexisting
On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 04:39:15PM -0400, Brandon Van Every wrote:
> But, I've never observed dynamic linking complications in
> all the time that CMake has been tested. Peter Keller's post also seems to
> indicate that static linking is the case more likely to cause problems.
In general, an easy
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On May 14, 2007, at 1:52 PM, John Cowan wrote:
Kon Lovett scripsit:
Maybe require Cygwin for Spiffy?
That would be extremely annoying, since Cygwin gets very upset if
there is more than one instance of cygwin1.dll on the system;
you can't packa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On May 14, 2007, at 12:19 PM, Graham Fawcett wrote:
On 14 May 2007 16:05:34 -0300, Mario Domenech Goulart
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 14 May 2007 14:58:26 -0400 "Graham Fawcett"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Insert fuzzy, incomplete thought
On Mon, 14 May 2007 17:41:00 -0300 "Alex Queiroz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5/14/07, Kon Lovett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Maybe require Cygwin for Spiffy?
>
> I hope this won't be necessary, since it would jeopardize the
> product I'm about to deploy to a client.
As far as I
Hallo,
On 5/14/07, Kon Lovett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Maybe require Cygwin for Spiffy?
I hope this won't be necessary, since it would jeopardize the
product I'm about to deploy to a client.
--
-alex
___
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-
On 5/14/07, Shawn W. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On May 14, 2007, at 10:24 AM, Brandon Van Every wrote:
>
> Ok Mac OS X users, what say you? Should we tie your hands for your
> own good, or give you the freedom to cut off your own fingers?
>
I don't care about static linking.
I've yet to h
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On May 14, 2007, at 12:57 PM, Alex Queiroz wrote:
Hallo,
On 5/14/07, John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
IMHO it is not worth working so hard to get this corner case correct;
you will end up reimplementing half of Cygwin.
This is needed
Hallo,
On 5/14/07, John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
IMHO it is not worth working so hard to get this corner case correct;
you will end up reimplementing half of Cygwin.
This is needed for Spiffy to work on Windows.
Are you sure? "." and ".." really do exist in directories that a
Kon Lovett scripsit:
> This comes down to a question of platform abstraction. Which I
> suspect is the unspoken point of Mario's. We do need to remember that
> whatever their compatibility layers/modes Win32 & MacOS X are not
> unix. But Chicken does seem to have a bent for providing a commo
On 14 May 2007 16:05:34 -0300, Mario Domenech Goulart
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 14 May 2007 14:58:26 -0400 "Graham Fawcett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Insert fuzzy, incomplete thought here, about how we could use a system
> for cooperatively defining unit tests against Chicken and exte
On Mon, 14 May 2007 14:58:26 -0400 "Graham Fawcett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5/14/07, Kon Lovett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On May 14, 2007, at 11:28 AM, John Cowan wrote:
> > > Ah. No. The Win32 kernel does *not* ignore trailing backslashes the
> > > way the Unix kernel ignores trail
On 5/14/07, Kon Lovett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On May 14, 2007, at 11:28 AM, John Cowan wrote:
> Ah. No. The Win32 kernel does *not* ignore trailing backslashes the
> way the Unix kernel ignores trailing slashes -- instead, it returns
> file-not-found errors.
This comes down to a question of
On May 14, 2007, at 11:28 AM, John Cowan wrote:
Mario Domenech Goulart scripsit:
Isn't (file-exists? ".\\") supposed to return ".\\" on windows?
Ah. No. The Win32 kernel does *not* ignore trailing backslashes the
way the Unix kernel ignores trailing slashes -- instead, it returns
file-not
Mario Domenech Goulart scripsit:
> Isn't (file-exists? ".\\") supposed to return ".\\" on windows?
Ah. No. The Win32 kernel does *not* ignore trailing backslashes the
way the Unix kernel ignores trailing slashes -- instead, it returns
file-not-found errors.
Note also that the root directory of
On May 14, 2007, at 10:56 AM, Shawn W. wrote:
On May 14, 2007, at 10:24 AM, Brandon Van Every wrote:
On 5/14/07, Peter Keller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Mon, May
14, 2007 at 11:55:31AM -0400, Brandon Van Every wrote:
> Any static linking horror stories out there?
I CAN'T make statical
On May 14, 2007, at 10:24 AM, Brandon Van Every wrote:
On 5/14/07, Peter Keller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Mon, May
14, 2007 at 11:55:31AM -0400, Brandon Van Every wrote:
> Any static linking horror stories out there?
I CAN'T make statically linked C programs on OS X using the compiler
On May 14, 2007, at 9:48 AM, Mario Domenech Goulart wrote:
Shouldn't (file-exists? ".\\") return the path to the current
directory?
Not according to the documentation. But this can be changed.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean. The documentation says:
,[procedure] (file-exis
On 5/14/07, Peter Keller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 11:55:31AM -0400, Brandon Van Every wrote:
> Any static linking horror stories out there?
Sure, I have some that aren't necessarily apple related, but could
happen on that platform.
Ok Mac OS X users, what say you?
On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 11:55:31AM -0400, Brandon Van Every wrote:
> Any static linking horror stories out there?
Sure, I have some that aren't necessarily apple related, but could
happen on that platform. Although, it isn't so much of static linking as
static/dynamic linking. You need both sides
Hi Kon,
Thanks for your answer. Comments bellow.
On Mon, 14 May 2007 09:25:52 -0700 Kon Lovett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On May 11, 2007, at 12:18 PM, Mario Domenech Goulart wrote:
>
> > Sorry for the maybe stupid question: is the following expression
> > supposed to return #f on Windows?
>
On May 11, 2007, at 12:18 PM, Mario Domenech Goulart wrote:
Hi folks,
Sorry for the maybe stupid question: is the following expression
supposed to return #f on Windows?
(file-exists? ".\\")
(file-exists? (current-directory)) returns the path to the current
directory.
Under Unix[-like] sys
On 5/14/07, Thomas Christian Chust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Brandon Van Every wrote:
> [...]
> On the other hand, we could eliminate all support for static linking,
> bowing to the One True Apple Way Of Doing Things [TM]. How do people
> feel about that?
I wouldn't mind if static linking wa
Ivan Raikov scripsit:
> I call it a "dense" implementation, because
> when the current capacity is exceeded, it simply allocates a new
> vector, and copies the underlying vector to it.
You should explain in the documentation how the vector grows, thus:
An attempt to set the i'th element
Brandon Van Every wrote:
> [...]
> On the other hand, we could eliminate all support for static linking,
> bowing to the One True Apple Way Of Doing Things [TM]. How do people
> feel about that?
> [...]
Hello,
I wouldn't mind if static linking was not supported. But in that case we
can just as
On 5/13/07, Brandon Van Every <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hey I just had a brilliant idea. We don't have to rename anything. We
could just symlink libchicken-s.a to libchicken.a. Then the user can have
his cake and eat it too.
On the other hand, we could eliminate all support for static
Greetings,
I have created an implementation of dynamically-growing "dense"
vectors based on SRFI-43. The URL of the egg is here:
http://www.call-with-current-continuation.org/eggs/dyn-vector.html
dyn-vector uses the underlying Chicken vector representation, so the
size of a dyn-vector object
35 matches
Mail list logo
