ldap-bind egg

Hi all. In a Scheme application, I have to authenticate users against an LDAP server (the server is from Microsoft). Is the ldap-bind egg ( https://wiki.call-cc.org/eggref/4/ldap-bind ) a good match for this task? If so, is there a chance that it will be ported from Chicken-4 to Chicken-5?

Re: [ANN] CHICKEN 5.3.0 release candidate available

Hi. The segmentation violation disappeared after cleaning my build script for chicken. (It contained an old "-mpreferred-stack-boundary=4" in C_COMPILER_OPTIMIZATION_OPTIONS, which I dropped now.) So, the RC looks good to me. Ciao Sven

Re: [ANN] CHICKEN 5.3.0 release candidate available

Hi. gcc 10.3.0, amd64, Ubuntu 21.04 I am getting a new "Error: segmentation violation", when I add (time .) around my main function mf call: (time (mf (cons (car (argv)) (command-line-arguments The error happens after this mf call is finished. Worked for 5.2 (and earlier). I hope someone

New egg for C5: tokyocabinet

Hello. I published my first C5 egg: (a minimal set of) bindings to the tokyocabinet library. Currenty, this covers only reading from tch files; I will extend the egg when I need more functions. I tested it with test-new-egg (very useful tool, Mario); also many thanks to Felix, who helped me

srfi-19 for C5?

Hi all. I found http://wiki.call-cc.org/eggref/5/srfi-19 and assumed that SRFI-19 is supported by C5. But chicken-install fails because a dependency leads to posix-utils (and probably more eggs that are missing in C5). Is this analysis correct or is my cache broken? Ciao Sven

Re: [ANN] CHICKEN 5.2.0 release candidate available

Hi. The RC1 generates uncompilable C code for my Scheme code. This code worked for all previous Chicken versions (tested today: 5.1.0). If I use csc -O3 (-O2 is ok), I get 19 gcc errors, e.g. nallch.c:1395027: error: void value not ignored as it ought to be

[Chicken-users] SRFI-38 notation

Hi. Are there any plans to support SRFI-38 (or similar functionality as provided by R7RS) in Chicken 5 natively? I use the reference implementation of SRFI-38, but reading of s-expressions with many thousand sharings becomes a bottleneck, e.g. 3 hours instead of 1 second. (The reason is the use

Re: [Chicken-users] Segmentation violation with chicken 5.1.0

Peter Bex wrote, 2019-06-23 14:51: > On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 02:33:10PM +0200, Peter Bex wrote: >> [panic] Low-level type assertion >> C_blockp((C_word)C_VAL1(C__PREV_TMPST.n1))=#t failed at chickenprob3.c:93488 >> - execution terminated > > Here's a minimal reproducible testcase: > > (define

Re: [Chicken-users] Segmentation violation with chicken 5.1.0

Felix wrote, 2019-06-22 20:42: >> > Hello. >> > >> > I have a strange problem with legacy code that works in many >> > other Schemes and Chicken 5 csi, but the binary compiled with Chicken 5 >> > crashes. >> > I have a reduced example: >> > http://sempria.de:9080/resources/chickenprob3.tar..bz2

[Chicken-users] Segmentation violation with chicken 5.1.0

Hello. I have a strange problem with legacy code that works in many other Schemes and Chicken 5 csi, but the binary compiled with Chicken 5 crashes. I have a reduced example: http://sempria.de:9080/resources/chickenprob3.tar.bz2 Just unpack and type make in the resulting directory. It shows

Re: [Chicken-users] SRFIs in Chicken 5

Hi Mario. Mario wrote, 2019-06-10 20:04: > On Mon, 10 Jun 2019 19:50:51 +0200 (CEST) Sven wrote: > >> Hi. >> >> Is there a Chicken 5 version of the following >> document, which seems to belong to Chicken 4 (?): >> >> http://wiki.call-cc.org/SRFI-conformance > > /SRFI-conformance is probably

[Chicken-users] SRFIs in Chicken 5

Hi. Is there a Chicken 5 version of the following document, which seems to belong to Chicken 4 (?): http://wiki.call-cc.org/SRFI-conformance Ciao Sven ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org

Re: [Chicken-users] [ANN] CHICKEN 5.1.0 release candidate available

Operating system: Ubuntu 19.04 Hardware platform: amd64 C Compiler: gcc 9.1.0 x32-ABI Installation works?: yes Tests work?: yes Installation of eggs works?: yes ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org

Re: [Chicken-users] bind egg: uint8_t

Hi Evan. Evan, 2019-01-16 08:54: > Basic support for [u]int8_t has been added to bind 1.2.4. These map to > the [unsigned-]byte FFI types. Note that this means they will not check > for overflowing values but will be truncated instead, per the warning > here:

[Chicken-users] bind egg: uint8_t

Hi. The bind egg knows about uint32_t and uint64_t, but not uint8_t. Can this be added in some way to allow parsing of struct definitions that use many uint8_t? (At the moment, I don't need to access such struct members.) BTW: "Version History" in http://wiki.call-cc.org/eggref/5/bind contains

Re: [Chicken-users] pp and write ignore keyword-style

keywords (arg1: , #:suffix). Is there any Chicken function that can write code in this way? ('display' won't help here because of strings etc.) If not, I would suggest a new parameter pretty-print-keyword-style for the module (chicken pretty-print). Ciao Sven > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 4:52 PM Sve

[Chicken-users] pp and write ignore keyword-style

Hi. pp and write (in chicken 5) do not respect the parameter (keyword-style); Only display respects keyword-style. #;1> (import (chicken pretty-print)) ; loading /usr/local/chicken-5.0.0-x32/lib/chicken/9/chicken.pretty-print.import.so ... #;2> (keyword-style) #:suffix #;3> (write '(arg1: 1))

Re: [Chicken-users] CHICKEN 5.0.0 release candidate 4 available

Hi. I am testing rc4 with the X32 ABI. Is it ok that C_COMPILER_OPTIMIZATION_OPTIONS is not respected when building chicken-do? I am using this make variable to pass in an -I option that is required by Ubuntu's gcc-8 in X32 mode. (Sorry, I have no cleaner solution right now.) This approach fails

Re: [Chicken-users] string-ci<=? and string-ci>=?

Hi Vasilij. VS wrote, 2018-09-11 09:26: >> > (string-ci<=? "test" "tes") >> #t >> > (string-ci>=? "test" "tes") >> #f > > This is odd. Here's some source code: > > (set! scheme#string-ci<=? (lambda (s1 s2) > (compare >s1 s2

[Chicken-users] string-ci<=? and string-ci>=?

Hi. The issue reported by Nils Holm in http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.scheme/t/6b8be06b84b39a7 affects chicken 5, too: > (string-ci<=? "test" "tes") #t > (string-ci>=? "test" "tes") #f Ciao Sven ___ Chicken-users mailing list

Re: [Chicken-users] Porting eggs to Chicken 5

Hi Peter. Peter Bex schrieb am 2018-08-14 13:08: > On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 12:56:04PM +0200, Sven Hartrumpf wrote: >> Thanks. This helped a lot. >> There are many C library bindings relying on easyffi. >> Are there any plans to port the easyffi egg? > > This is on

Re: [Chicken-users] Porting eggs to Chicken 5

Hi Christian. ckreen, 2018-08-14 08:18: > * Sven Hartrumpf [180814 07:56]: >> Hi. >> >> I am trying to port some of my code from Chicken 4 to 5. >> Is there a small guide how to port an egg from 4 to 5? >> Is there a wish list or popularity list for eggs >&g

Re: [Chicken-users] reachable top-level functions and variables

Hi Marc. SH wrote, 2017-07-12: >> I am looking for a compiler option that will produce output >> that could give me a start for determining a list of reachable >> top-level functions/variables. I have tried other compilers but they >> tend to deliver too many false positives for complex programs.

Re: [Chicken-users] reachable top-level functions and variables

Hi Peter. Peter Bex <pe...@more-magic.net> schrieb am 2017-07-13 09:05: > On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 08:52:31AM +0200, Sven Hartrumpf wrote: >> Yes, functions that can never be called from the compiled program >> are still there. >> Will the profile output of the co

Re: [Chicken-users] reachable top-level functions and variables

Hi Evan. Evan Hanson , 2017-07-13 11:28: > Hi Sven, > > Have you tried `csc -analyze-only -debug d`? No, the output could be a useful start. > This will give you a full list of value definitions, including module > prefixes for any identifiers bound within a module. This

[Chicken-users] reachable top-level functions and variables

Hi all. I am looking for a compiler option that will produce output that could give me a start for determining a list of reachable top-level functions/variables. I have tried other compilers but they tend to deliver too many false positives for complex programs. Ciao Sven

[Chicken-users] Heap shrinkage, -:hs

Hi all. I would like to experiment with heap shrinking (-:hs) for long running, memory/GC intensive processes. I checked runtime.c and I read the following shrink condition: count < percentage(percentage(heap_size, C_heap_shrinkage), DEFAULT_HEAP_SHRINKAGE_USED) This shrink condition means

[Chicken-users] libotr bindings (Off-the-Record)

Hi. Does anybody know (partial) FFI bindings for libotr (Off-the-Record Messaging, https://otr.cypherpunks.ca/ )? (I know that there is a native Scheme implementation of OTR, but it relies on R6RS features.) Ciao Sven ___ Chicken-users mailing list

Re: [Chicken-users] [ANN] CHICKEN 4.11.0 release candidate 1 available

> we are happy to announce the first release candidate of the upcoming Good work! Time to go forward . (5) :-) Operating system: Ubuntu 16.04 (Beta) Hardware platform: x86-64 C Compiler: GCC 5.3.1 AND clang 3.8 Installation works?: yes Tests work?: yes Installation of eggs works?: yes Sven

Re: [Chicken-users] How to avoid predefined cond-expand features in csc?

Hi Peter. PB wrote on 2015-12-24 11:25: > On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 11:10:40AM +0100, Sven Hartrumpf wrote: >> Hi. >> >> csc seems to predefine some cond-expand feature (srfi-1, srfi-13, srfi-14, >> srfi-69, maybe more) for the program to be compiled. How to preven

[Chicken-users] How to avoid predefined cond-expand features in csc?

Hi. csc seems to predefine some cond-expand feature (srfi-1, srfi-13, srfi-14, srfi-69, maybe more) for the program to be compiled. How to prevent this? (I fear that this has been asked before, but I could not find the answer.) Example: > echo "(cond-expand (srfi-1 (print "srfi-1")) (else))" >

[Chicken-users] unary 'when' and 'unless'

Hi. A hidden bug in my code was uncovered by loading it into another Scheme (guile), which enforced the limitation of 'when' and 'unless' (in R7RS) to at least one result part. Chicken accepts 'when' and 'unless' with only one argument: > csi CHICKEN (c) 2008-2015, The CHICKEN Team (c)

[Chicken-users] x32 ABI fits Chicken very well

Hi all. Now that the "apply-hack" files are gone, Chicken is even more portable. I am happy to report that Chicken 4.10.1 builds perfectly for the x32 ABI ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X32_ABI ). Why should you try x32 that most people ignore? - For garbage-intense Scheme program, you will see

[Chicken-users] vim support for s-expression comments

Hi all. The page http://wiki.call-cc.org/vim is very useful for vim users, but unfortunately the patch at the beginning does not apply cleanly to current syntax/scheme.vim Are any newer patches around? Ciao Sven ___ Chicken-users mailing list

Re: [Chicken-users] curl egg

Peter Bex pe...@more-magic.net schrieb am Mon, 3 Aug 2015 15:00:31 +0200: On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 02:46:53PM +0200, Sven Hartrumpf wrote: Peter Bex pe...@more-magic.net schrieb am Mon, 3 Aug 2015 10:15:57 +0200: Out of curiosity, is there something important missing in the http-client egg

[Chicken-users] curl egg

Hi all. Chicken 3 had a curl egg. It is linked in the page http://wiki.call-cc.org/eggref/3/index as http://wiki.call-cc.org/eggref/3/curl , but the latter page is missing. Where is this old egg? Any ideas what must be done to port it to Chicken 4? Ciao Sven

Re: [Chicken-users] curl egg

Peter Bex pe...@more-magic.net schrieb am Mon, 3 Aug 2015 10:15:57 +0200: On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 10:00:28AM +0200, Sven Hartrumpf wrote: Hi all. Chicken 3 had a curl egg. It is linked in the page http://wiki.call-cc.org/eggref/3/index as http://wiki.call-cc.org/eggref/3/curl

Re: [Chicken-users] [Chicken-announce] CHICKEN 4.10.0 release candidate 4 available

Hi Tim. Tim wrote: many arguments supported. testing 'apply' with 0..2048 (maximum apply argument count)... If this segfaults on x86-64, try updating GCC (4.5 has a code-generation bug): invoking directly with 0..50... invoking directly with 1998..2048 (maximum interpreted direct argument

[Chicken-users] sendgrid egg: support for attribute files (attachments)?

Hi all. The egg sendgrid is very useful already. Does anybody know how to use the API attribute files (= attachments) with this egg? Ciao Sven ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org

Re: [Chicken-users] How to avoid srfi-13 bindings when using the slime egg?

Fri, 24 Oct 2014 09:03:53 +0200, ckeen wrote: * Sven Hartrumpf hartru...@gmx.net [141023 19:41]: If I install the slime egg and start chicken-slime from inside Emacs, the REPL has bindings for SRFI-13 names, e.g. ; SLIME 2014-10-10 CSI (string-count abc #\a) 1 Can this be avoided

[Chicken-users] How to avoid srfi-13 bindings when using the slime egg?

Hi all. If I install the slime egg and start chicken-slime from inside Emacs, the REPL has bindings for SRFI-13 names, e.g. ; SLIME 2014-10-10 CSI (string-count abc #\a) 1 Can this be avoided (because this conflicts with definitions in other projects)? Ciao Sven

Re: [Chicken-users] Reset counters when profiling Chicken programs

Hi Peter. Thanks for your answers! Fri, 29 Aug 2014 09:13:45 +0200, Peter.Bex wrote: On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 09:03:52AM +0200, Sven Hartrumpf wrote: Is there a Chicken function to reset all counters (to 0) when a program is run in profile mode? Background: I need profiling results, but only

[Chicken-users] Reset counters when profiling Chicken programs

Hi all. Is there a Chicken function to reset all counters (to 0) when a program is run in profile mode? Background: I need profiling results, but only after my program reached a specific point and until it terminates. Ciao Sven ___ Chicken-users

[Chicken-users] Scheme jobs

Hi all. I just came across a job platform dedicated to Scheme friends. If you want to combine happy programming and money :-), have a look: http://functionaljobs.com/ Yes, if you read this site carefully, you might complain that I am a customer. Yes, I am ... but any help in a world with too

Re: [Chicken-users] Declare large expressions as read-only and not gc-able?

Sun, 5 Jan 2014 15:25:38 -0600, zbigniewsz wrote: I'll bet if you define a 100MB literal, the resulting C file would be at least a gigabyte and neither CHICKEN nor gcc would be able to handle it. You could try it and let us know. You are right. chicken (and others like bigloo) does not

[Chicken-users] Declare large expressions as read-only and not gc-able?

Hi all. Is there a recommended way to declare some large expressions ( 100 MB) in a compiled program as read-only and more importantly as not gc-able (the garbage collector should be saved from traversing these large structures again and again)? Should the constant value be compiled in or should

[Chicken-users] Is chicken supported on 32 bit Linux?

Hi. Tue, 28 May 2013 23:25:35 +0200, Peter.Bex wrote: For now I'd say this is a problem with your particular gcc version. If you or someone else can reproduce this and come up with a patch that would be great. I know this problem for a year or so (gcc 4.7.N, gcc 4.8.N; C optimization -O2 or

[Chicken-users] [PATCH] Make library tests compare numbers within epsilon

Hi Peter. Wed, 29 May 2013 19:06:26 +0200, Peter.Bex wrote: This patch should fix it, but it does in a roundabout way: converting the number to a string causes it to lose precision because of the default value of (flonum-print-precision). It's more explicit to check whether the two values

[Chicken-users] location of chicken.h

Hi all. Why does chicken-install silex wants to include chicken.h, although current chicken versions install only chicken/chicken.h ? chicken-install silex retrieving ... connecting to host chicken.kitten-technologies.co.uk, port 80 ... ... installing silex: ... changing current directory to

[Chicken-users] severe bug in file-exists?

Hi all. I have just lost some files (fortunately, they can be restored somehow) because file-exists? returned #f for large files ( 2 GB). Version: CHICKEN (c)2008-2011 The Chicken Team (c)2000-2007 Felix L. Winkelmann Version 4.7.4 (rev b6eba65) linux-unix-gnu-x86 [ manyargs dload ] compiled

Re: [Chicken-users] severe bug in file-exists?

Hi Christian. Wed, 28 Sep 2011 15:10:46 +0200, ckeen wrote: I have just lost some files I hope the data is not lost completely. No, it can be recovered automatically :-) I have filed bug #706 in the tracker. https://bugs.call-cc.org/ticket/706 Thanks for filing the bug. Looking at

Re: [Chicken-users] severe bug in file-exists?

Wed, 28 Sep 2011 15:40:57 +0200, ckeen wrote: As I see it, this procedure needs an overhaul anyway. If fstat fails it returns #f regardless the reason. On IRC we have been coming to the understanding that we should raise an I/O exception for all other cases (if the fstat fails for other

[Chicken-users] Recommended ways to keep 32bit and 64bit chickens

Hi all. How do chicken users keep their 32bit chicken and their 64bit chicken on one computer with minimal version confusion? Any recommendations welcome. Sven ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org

[Chicken-users] ANN: Parley v0.1 released: When read-line is n^[A^W^[B

Hi Christian. Sun, 17 Jul 2011 22:46:34 +0200, ckeen wrote: I have put up a small ratinonale about it here: http://pestilenz.org/~ckeen/blog/posts/parley.html Nice clean blog! What blog software do you use? (I checked the HTML sources but I have no idea so far ...) Ciao Sven

[Chicken-users] profiler reports strange seconds values

Hi all. chicken-profile reports accumulated runtime in a column labeled seconds. Why do I see numbers like 716254787.383, when the program ran only 200 times with average runtime of 5 seconds? Are the numbers in microseconds? I compiled my Scheme program as follows: csc -d0 -O3 -unsafe

[Chicken-users] Daily development snapshots?

Hi all. Small irritation: In http://code.call-cc.org/, one reads We provide tarballs with nightly development snapshots of the source code. The nightly does not fit here because this sentence links to development snapshots like the one Felix just announced. Ciao Sven

[Chicken-users] Chicken segfault

Hi all. When stepping from optimization level 2 to 3, I get a segmentation fault. level 3: chicken r-matcher-ch.scm -output-file r-matcher-ch.c -debug-level 1 -optimize-level 2 Warning: redefinition of standard binding: symbol-string Segmentation fault [ERROR: 139] level 2: chicken

Re: [Chicken-users] Chicken segfault

Hi all. Thu, 16 Jun 2011 19:12:22 +0200, Peter.Bex wrote: How should I investigate this problem? Tried gdb? Good idea. I rebuilt chicken with DEBUGBUILD=1 and ran gdb on chicken: (gdb) run r-matcher-ch.scm -output-file r-matcher-ch.c -debug-level 1 -optimize-level 3 Program received

[Chicken-users] Setting options for make test

Hi all. I am building chicken (Version 4.6.5, linux-unix-gnu-x86-64 [64bit manyargs dload], git) with special settings of C_COMPILER and C_COMPILER_OPTIMIZATION_OPTIONS when invoking make. For the make targets default and install, this works perfectly, but for the make target test these variables

[Chicken-users] Setting options for make test

Hi Felix. Tue, 15 Feb 2011 12:32:45 +0100 (CET), felix wrote: I am building chicken (Version 4.6.5, linux-unix-gnu-x86-64 [64bit manyargs dload], git) with special settings of C_COMPILER and C_COMPILER_OPTIMIZATION_OPTIONS when invoking make. For the make targets default and install, this

Re: [Chicken-users] Setting options for make test

Tue, 15 Feb 2011 14:32:02 +0100 (CET), felix wrote: These settings should go into chicken-config.h and thus be respected by csc. Do you override these variables in your invocation of make ... check? Yes. Regenerating chicken-config.h solved my problem. Thanks, Felix. Sven

Re: [Chicken-users] Tokyo Cabinet Error

Hello Thomas. Your example works for me in 2 setups: chicken 4.6.3 + tokyocabinet-egg 2.01 chicken 4.6.4(experimental) + tokyocabinet-egg 2.2 (submitted to Alex) Two hints: 1. Try to open with this option: mmap-size: 0 2. If the above does not help: I assume that 4.6.0 might be broken or

Re: [Chicken-users] Problems Installing the lookup-table Egg

Fri, 10 Dec 2010 09:36:24 -0800, klovett wrote: Sorry, I suspect this is caused by the use of backwards incompatible module syntax on my part. Specifically the string as body feature for textual inclusion. I will fix this and release a new version. Is the lookup-table egg supposed to be

Re: [Chicken-users] Problems Installing the lookup-table Egg

Hi Christian. Sun, 2 Jan 2011 18:32:14 +0100, ckeen wrote: The workaround is to (define-constant MAGIC-LIMIT 12) in lookup-table-body.scm before the use of it. Thanks for your quick help. Works for me too. Now I was able to solve another issue for the experimental branch: You need to replace

[Chicken-users] tokyocabinet egg: table API

SH In the uploaded version, there is only support for the hash API SH (tch), not for the table API (tct). AS I seem to recall someone working on a table API. Better than this :-) It's already in the current egg (thanks to Evan Eusey?). I will test and extend the documentation wiki as needed.

[Chicken-users] tokyocabinet egg: table API

Hi all. I use the tokyocabinet egg from time to time. In the uploaded version, there is only support for the hash API (tch), not for the table API (tct). Does anybody have a table API (I need only tc-tdb-open, tc-tdb-close, and tc-tdb-get-columns (= tctdbget3 in C))? If not: Alex (Shinn), will

[Chicken-users] Re: Plans for development snapshots?

Hi all. Thu, 09 Dec 2010 12:40:01 +0100 (CET), hartrumpf wrote: Are there any plans for a new development snapshot? (This would save me some hours for patching several 4.6.3 installations. :-) ) I am surprised: this took me only some minutes - due to the streamlined build process of chicken,

[Chicken-users] chicken script with many CLI arguments

Tue, 07 Dec 2010 08:49:36 -0500 (EST), felix wrote: If you add -:d before that, what is shown? If you mean the following #! /usr/local/bin/csi -:d -script (write (command-line-arguments)) - no change and no additional output. ___ Chicken-users

[Chicken-users] chicken script with many CLI arguments

Tue, 07 Dec 2010 14:56:36 +0100 (CET), hartrumpf wrote: #! /usr/local/bin/csi -:d -script (write (command-line-arguments)) - no change and no additional output. Sorry, the output did change to: [panic] illegal runtime option - execution terminated

Re: [Chicken-users] Optimizer bug

Sat, 04 Sep 2010 20:30:07 +0200 (CEST), hartrumpf wrote: Sat, 04 Sep 2010 12:19:48 +0200 (CEST), felix wrote: Are these redefinitions genuine or are the warnings bogus? The warnings are ok because I define the three functions myself. Can this be a problem here? To answer my own question: I

[Chicken-users] Optimizer bug

Hi all. Some months ago -optimize-level 2 stopped working for me. As -optimize-level 1 still works, inlining must be the culprit (?): /usr/local/bin/chicken nallch.scm -output-file nallch.c -debug-level 0 -optimize-level 2 Warning: redefinition of standard binding: symbol-string Warning:

Re: [Chicken-users] Optimizer bug

Sat, 04 Sep 2010 12:19:48 +0200 (CEST), felix wrote: Are these redefinitions genuine or are the warnings bogus? The warnings are ok because I define the three functions myself. Can this be a problem here? Error: (=) bad argument type - not a number: #f Call history: syntax

[Chicken-users] Birthday present

As a birthday present, here is a nice little bug: library.scm contains: ((or (char=? c #\x00) (char=? c #\xff)) (##sys#read-error port attempt to read expression from something that looks like binary data)) The second condition is too strict because it forbids to write #\ÿ (code 255 in

Re: [Chicken-users] Re: new egg documentation bootstrap

Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:12:52 -0500, ddp wrote: Besides, I live in emacs. Why do I have to edit in this little weird box with almost none of my normal keymap? That can be solved by using a browser with a suitable editor plugin. For example, ViewSourceWith for Firefox allows to use any editor for

Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Memory limits

Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:48:28 +0100 (CET), hartrumpf wrote: I managed to avoid this segmentation fault by switching from -optimize-level 3 to 2. The gdb backtrace is not really useful, so we better forget this error :-) With the changes in git of the last 2 days, higher optimize levels also work

Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Memory limits

Thu, 3 Dec 2009 12:03:13 +0100, ckeen wrote: Sorry to jump into this discussion out of nowhere. Can you write a small test for this? No :-( It's a big file that I compile (95000 LOC) and a big mistery. I have always failed to locate the exact error with gdb because the stack was ruined at the

[Chicken-users] types.db fix

It seems to me that the optional third argument of string-match-positions is not refleced in types.db Greetings Sven ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users

Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Memory limits

I managed to avoid this segmentation fault by switching from -optimize-level 3 to 2. The gdb backtrace is not really useful, so we better forget this error :-) Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x082d551f in f_299293 () Current language: auto The current source language is

Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Memory limits

Thu, 26 Nov 2009 17:52:37 +0100, Joerg.Wittenberger wrote: be careful about new gcc version! Yes, I can confirm this in some rare cases. Does -optimize-level change Chickens optimization? I hope so :-) The page http://chicken.wiki.br/man/4/Using%20the%20compiler#compiler-command-line-format

[Chicken-users] Memory limits

Hi all. I switched to a 64bit version of chicken because I hit the 1GB limit for 32bit. Now, it looks like there is a 2GB limit for 64bit? Ciao Sven ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org

Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Memory limits

Hi Felix. Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:33:39 + (UTC), bunny351 wrote: More information, please. I was hoping to hear that these limits are well known and can be avoided by ... :-) OK. What setup should I investigate first? - segmentation fault of chicken-compiled 32bit binary at 1 GB - segmentation

Re: [Chicken-users] chicken core moved to git

Hi all. I could not find the git project name ... Could somebody provide a complete git clone ... command on the following page: http://chicken.wiki.br/Development Just for the git dummies, sorry :-( Sven ___ Chicken-users mailing list

[Chicken-users] OPTIMIZE_FOR_SPEED

Hi all. Chicken has a new build option to be passed to 'make': OPTIMIZE_FOR_SPEED=1 It turns on -O3 instead of -Os (Linux). As I reported earlier this summer, the 'make check' always fails for me when using -O3. See http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/chicken-users/2009-07/msg00029.html for

[Chicken-users] Re: 4.1.0rc1

Mon, 6 Jul 2009 14:21:31 +0200, bunny351 wrote: Sven Hartrumpf Sven.Hartrumpf at FernUni-Hagen.de writes: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 15:45:56 +0200 (CEST), Sven.Hartrumpf wrote: ~/tmp/chicken-4.1.0rc1/tests sh runtests.sh compiler tests ... ../chicken

Re: [Chicken-users] Re: 4.1.0rc1

Mon, 6 Jul 2009 14:13:04 +0200, bunny351 wrote: On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 3:56 PM, Sven Hartrumpfsven.hartru...@fernuni-hagen.de wrote: Sorry, I have not much time the following days. This is what I got (not much): chicken-4.1.0rc1/tests gdb ../chicken GNU gdb 6.8 Copyright (C) 2008 Free

Re: [Chicken-users] Re: 4.1.0rc1

Fri, 3 Jul 2009 11:37:23 + (UTC), bunny351 wrote: Damn. I had this on galinha the other day, but thought it was a dynamic linking problem. I have currently no access to a Linux machine with gdb, so perhaps someone can add DEBUGBUILD=1 to the build and give me a gdb backtrace? Sorry, I

Re: [Chicken-users] 4.1.0rc1

Hi Felix. Thu, 2 Jul 2009 15:03:09 +0200, bunny351 wrote: The release candidate for 4.1.0 is available now at If you have a few minutes, download it and give it a try. This version (and all svn versions after 2009-06-25 or so) showed the following problem (Linux, gcc440, i686): cd tests/

Re: [Chicken-users] The Documentation Problem

Fri, 19 Jun 2009 20:48:24 -0600, matt wrote: There are several such projects with a solid infrastructure - but they sometimes lack user support. For example, please have a look at (and consider contributing to): SchemeCrossReference http://practical-scheme.net/wiliki/schemexref.cgi Yes,

Re: [Chicken-users] The Documentation Problem

Hi Matt. Fri, 19 Jun 2009 02:25:28 -0600, matt wrote: And I conceived of a project that might make it easier to access all the various docs. I call it SUDS (Scheme Unified Documentation Server). Basically, there would be a lightweight Web server (maybe Spiffy-based?) that could be deployed

Re: [Chicken-users] bootstrap on svn?

Hi. Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:32:14 +0200 (CEST), Sven.Hartrumpf wrote: In recent weeks, bootstrapping (on svn) did not work for me. Is bootstrap.tar.gz too old (2009-01-08 or so)? Felix, thanks for updatin the bootstrap.tar.gz, but it was probably a different problem: using gcc 4.3.3 plus -O3 and

[Chicken-users] bootstrap on svn?

Hi all. In recent weeks, bootstrapping (on svn) did not work for me. Is bootstrap.tar.gz too old (2009-01-08 or so)? Or did the bootstrap procedure change? I did the following: make PLATFORM=linux bootstrap make PLATFORM=linux confclean make PLATFORM=linux CHICKEN=chicken-boot output from the

[Chicken-users] chicken-primitive-inlines.scm

Hi all. Can anybody explain how one can exploit the following new file: chicken-primitive-inlines.scm Ciao Sven pgpxC8ALaxkuR.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org

Re: [Chicken-users] Ugarit: A backup/archival system

Tue, 27 Jan 2009 10:54:25 +, alaric wrote: I'm pleased to announce the release of the first beta release of Ugarit, a backup/archival system based around content-addressed storage, written in Chicken Scheme. Very impressive. Some questions and comments: - Tiger hash: What happens in case

Re: [Chicken-users] symbol-string

Wed, 10 Dec 2008 12:59:57 +0100, Joerg.Wittenberger wrote: In my case the following definition (in the lowest level module of my app) gains me a factor of two in runtime!! (global-set! 'symbol-string (lambda (s) (##sys#check-symbol s 'symbol-string) (##sys#symbol-string s))) I have

Re: [Chicken-users] compiling 32bit chicken on x86_64

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 09:25:12 +0900, daishi wrote: make -f Makefile.linux32 all make[1]: Entering directory `/home/daishi/src/chicken-3.2.0' gcc -m32 -shared \ -o libchicken.so library.o eval.o data-structures.o extras.o lolevel.o utils.o tcp.o srfi-1.o srfi-4.o srfi-13.o srfi-14.o srfi-18.o

Re: [Chicken-users] improved inlining

The resulting chicken (after clean and confclean) is not usable: chicken Error: unbound variable: ##compiler#initialize-compiler Thu, 30 Oct 2008 09:52:47 +0100, bunny351 wrote: Do you use chicken-boot ? Yes, as you told me before :-) make C_COMPILER=gcc432 ... CHICKEN=chicken-boot I

Re: [Chicken-users] hygienic/trunk switch

Hi. Wed, 1 Oct 2008 12:08:50 +0200, bunny351 wrote: The svn hygienic/trunk switch has been done. OK, I am using trunk. I tried the following: svn up make distclean make C_COMPILER=gcc432 C_COMPILER_OPTIMIZATION_OPTIONS=-O3 -ffast-math -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-builtin -march=pentium2

Re: [Chicken-users] chicken on linux64

Hi Graham. Wed, 20 Aug 2008 16:15:31 -0400, graham.fawcett wrote: I have some Chicken 2.x and 3.x Web applications in production on a 32-bit Intel Linux server. We may be upgrading to a new 64-bit Intel machine, and I'm wondering what kind of Chicken-specific road-bumps I might encounter when

Re: [Chicken-users] Profiling large programs

Hi Felix. Thu, 10 Jul 2008 09:10:09 +0200, bunny351 wrote: Enabling profiling adds considerable decorations to the code (so it's mostly a pure source-code-level operation). By doing more of the decoration on the C-level (and with the necessary changes to the backend), this could be reduced,

Re: [Chicken-users] Profiling large programs

Thu, 10 Jul 2008 12:39:33 +0200, bunny351 wrote: See trunk head. You can enable profiling for particular procedures like this; (declare (profile procedurename1 ...)) Works perfectly for me. Thanks for the fast implementation of this useful feature, Felix! pgpb5l0uvGrad.pgp Description: PGP

  1   2   >