Re: [Chicken-users] r7rs improper redefinition of imported symbol

John J Foerch writes: > Evan Hanson writes: > >> Hi John, >> >> You're quite right, this was indeed a bug relating to which bindings are >> implicitly available within R7RS libraries. >> >> This should be fixed in 0.0.5, just released and available

Re: [Chicken-users] r7rs improper redefinition of imported symbol

Evan Hanson writes: > Hi John, > > You're quite right, this was indeed a bug relating to which bindings are > implicitly available within R7RS libraries. > > This should be fixed in 0.0.5, just released and available shortly. If you > could have a go with that version and let

Re: [Chicken-users] r7rs improper redefinition of imported symbol

John Cowan writes: > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 4:51 PM, John J Foerch > wrote: > > I ran into a little problem when working with the r6rs-bytevectors > egg, > which provides an r7rs implementation of (r6rs bytevectors). The >

Re: [Chicken-users] r7rs improper redefinition of imported symbol

Hi John, You're quite right, this was indeed a bug relating to which bindings are implicitly available within R7RS libraries. This should be fixed in 0.0.5, just released and available shortly. If you could have a go with that version and let me know if you still run into problems, I'd

Re: [Chicken-users] r7rs improper redefinition of imported symbol

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 4:51 PM, John J Foerch wrote: I ran into a little problem when working with the r6rs-bytevectors egg, > which provides an r7rs implementation of (r6rs bytevectors). The > bytevector-copy! procedure has a different call signature in r6 than in >

[Chicken-users] r7rs improper redefinition of imported symbol

Hello, I ran into a little problem when working with the r6rs-bytevectors egg, which provides an r7rs implementation of (r6rs bytevectors). The bytevector-copy! procedure has a different call signature in r6 than in r7, and I found that as r6rs-bytevectors is currently written, its