Peter TB Brett pe...@peter-b.co.uk writes:
It seems pretty clear to me that the only (debatable) downside to
using Mark's implementation is that some definitions end up in the
wrong module, while your implementation has several potentially
*major* problems (including the necessity of
Hi Mark,
On Tue 24 Jan 2012 03:11, Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org writes:
you seem unabashedly content to lock us into using psyntax forever,
This statement is an exaggeration. While I am content with psyntax now,
all change is possible, with time. While it's important to think of the
future
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
On Tue 24 Jan 2012 11:30, Peter TB Brett pe...@peter-b.co.uk writes:
It seems pretty clear to me that the only (debatable) downside to using
Mark's implementation is that some definitions end up in the wrong
module, while your implementation has several
Hi Andy,
I'm worried about this change you recently committed:
diff --git a/module/ice-9/psyntax.scm b/module/ice-9/psyntax.scm
index 1bf3c32..fd33e98 100644
--- a/module/ice-9/psyntax.scm
+++ b/module/ice-9/psyntax.scm
@@ -636,7 +636,12 @@
;; labels must be comparable with eq?, have
Hello,
If we can already foresee the need to deprecate an interface, wouldn't
it be better not to add it in the first place?
I don't see the need to deprecate them now, not more than any other
identifier that we export.
I think this may be the key to this argument. There are two separate
On Tue 24 Jan 2012 14:25, Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org writes:
I don't see why we need universally-unique gensyms
I've already explained why they are not needed
for macros compiled in another session.
Ah, I forgot to reply to that. I found it:
On Mon 16 Jan 2012 14:28, Mark H Weaver
Hello Mark :)
Thanks again for your deep thoughts. This conversation is a bit
stressful for the both of us, but we wouldn't be having it if we didn't
both care about Guile.
In the spirit of diffusing tension here, feel free to imagine all of my
words as coming from Mr. Collins for the duration
On Tue 24 Jan 2012 15:01, Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org writes:
`local-eval' combines syntax objects from two different sessions into a
single syntax object (in the wrapper procedure), and thus there may be
label name collisions. Now, if this combined syntax object is
serialized as a
Hi David,
On Fri 20 Jan 2012 19:17, David Pirotte da...@altosw.be writes:
guile 2.0.3.150-88c0
guile-lib release-0.2.1-2-ge9fe22b
...
make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/local/src/guile-lib/git-clone/src'
../dev-environ /usr/local/bin/guile-tools compile -o
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
(define-syntax-rule (define-const x val)
(begin
(define t val)
(define-syntax x (identifier-syntax t
Here, `t' will have a fresh mark.
Now, if in one compilation unit, I do:
(define-const x 10)
And in another, I do:
(let
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
On Tue 24 Jan 2012 15:01, Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org writes:
`local-eval' combines syntax objects from two different sessions into a
single syntax object (in the wrapper procedure), and thus there may be
label name collisions. Now, if this combined
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
In the spirit of diffusing tension here, feel free to imagine all of my
words as coming from Mr. Collins for the duration of this thread ;-)
Hehe :)
On Tue 24 Jan 2012 14:25, Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
None
12 matches
Mail list logo
