[Chicken-users] Ann: refdb egg now available
Refdb allows you to store values in a three level hash-table like structure of flat files. The resulting data is friendly to branching and merging which can allow parallel editing of the spreadsheet. Only gnumeric is supported right now and the sheets must have unique row and column labels. Documentation (such as it is) is here: http://www.kiatoa.com/fossils/refdb Irrelevant aside: the example used in the documentation is from a real (albeit incomplete) project. Yes, Chicken Scheme is being used to control a vermiculture (worm composting) bin which will hopefully produced enough worms to supplement the feed to some quail. Sadly we have quail and not chickens :) I call it my worm condo, here is a snippet from the controlling code: 23:50:26 = condo: 32.5 degC, 59.5 %RH ambient: 37.7 degC, 6.3 %RH fan: off 23:51:49 = condo: 32.5 degC, 60.2 %RH ambient: 37.7 degC, 6.0 %RH fan: on 23:52:10 = condo: 32.5 degC, 58.3 %RH ambient: 37.8 degC, 6.0 %RH fan: off 23:52:31 = condo: 32.5 degC, 56.7 %RH ambient: 37.7 degC, 5.6 %RH fan: off 23:52:51 = condo: 32.5 degC, 57.4 %RH ambient: 37.7 degC, 6.0 %RH fan: off 23:53:12 = condo: 32.5 degC, 56.7 %RH ambient: 37.7 degC, 6.0 %RH fan: off 23:53:33 = condo: 32.4 degC, 55.9 %RH ambient: 37.7 degC, 6.0 %RH fan: off Thanks to Mario for so patiently coaching me on using fossil for publishing eggs and thanks to all the Chicken developers for Chicken. -- Matt -=- 90% of the nations wealth is held by 2% of the people. Bummer to be in the majority... ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
Re: [Chicken-users] bug update-uri in uri-common
I realize I already put down my vote, but I'd like to promote my case after some thought. I guess what we're trying to find out is what's more troublesome and/or surprising: 1. having to set the port explicitly (to #f?) when you want to change the scheme and its port 2. having to set the port explicitly back to its original value if you want to change scheme but not its port I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the user to realize he/she has to change the port if he/she changes the port (as in 1.). That requires an understanding of the relationship between scheme and port by the user. I do, however, think it's more unreasonable to expect the user to realize he/she has to change the port back to its original value if he wants to change the scheme but not the port. In this case, you need to understand the internals of uri-common. (You need to understand the scheme-port relationship as well to make sense of the API). I also think it's unfortunate that you cannot simply look at the keywords in update-uri and know exactly which fields are modified by quick glance. Thanks for considering the change :) my vote's on 1. K. On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 3:35 PM, Andy Bennett andy...@ashurst.eu.orgwrote: On Friday, 16 May 2014 14:28:51 BST, Andy Bennett wrote: Hi, If anyone on this mailinglist has strong opinions either way, please let yourselves be heard: now's the time to speak up. The existing behaviour seems reasonable as it only does it when setting scheme, not when setting other parts of the URI: - #;3 (update-uri (uri-reference http://localhost:8080/;) scheme: 'https) #URI-common: scheme=https port=#f host=localhost path=(/ ) query=() fragment=#f #;4 (update-uri (uri-reference http://localhost:8080/;) fragment: test) #URI-common: scheme=http port=8080 host=localhost path=(/ ) query=() fragment=test - Regards, @ndy -- andy...@ashurst.eu.org http://www.ashurst.eu.org/ 0x7EBA75FF ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
