* Matt Welland [111004 04:32]:
> It looks like the issue is related to my using include to load all the
> source files instead of (declare (unit blah)) etc.
>
> somehow procedures from included code is not visible to the eval but if I
> compile as units and link it works (at least in my testcase)
It looks like the issue is related to my using include to load all the
source files instead of (declare (unit blah)) etc.
somehow procedures from included code is not visible to the eval but if I
compile as units and link it works (at least in my testcase).
Seems like broken behavior to me but se
Hi Matt!
* Matt Welland [111003 16:34]:
> Oops, didn't copy chicken-users...
> -- Forwarded message --
> Thanks for taking a look Christian and yes, I did hose the cut 'n paste.
> I've modified the example to better reflect the usage and here is what I get
> with compiled code:
>
Oops, didn't copy chicken-users...
-- Forwarded message --
Thanks for taking a look Christian and yes, I did hose the cut 'n paste.
I've modified the example to better reflect the usage and here is what I get
with compiled code:
Chicken 3.3:
> ./test
((Hello 3rd one))
Chicken 4.7:
In types.db there is:
(##sys#foreign-pointer-argument
(#(procedure #:clean #:enforce)
##sys#foreign-pointer-argument (pointer) pointer)
((pointer) #(1)))
I don't have a good guess what the second list in the declaration
"((pointer) #(1))" means.
Nevertheless, I have some code, which checks tha
* Christian Kellermann [111003 10:11]:
> view.scm:
> (define foo (+ 1 2))
> (print foo)
>
> and then the interpreter:
> $ csi -nq test.scm
> 3
> #;1>
>
I forgot to add the interesting part:
#;1> foo
3
Cheers,
Christian
--
Who can (make) the muddy water (clear)? Let it be still, and it wil
Hi Matt,
* Matt Welland [111003 06:53]:
> The below code used to do a fine job of eval'ing a hodge-podge file of lists
> and strings but in Chicken4.7 the eval doesn't seem to see compiled routines
> in the parent code. Has eval changed in some incompatible way or do I need
> to keep digging for
