Re: GNU Guile 3.0.9rc1 available for testing!

Ludovic Courtès writes: > So something like the patch below? > > Thanks, > Ludo’. > > diff --git a/libguile/posix.c b/libguile/posix.c > index 74c743119..0b1fe2637 100644 > --- a/libguile/posix.c > +++ b/libguile/posix.c > @@ -105,8 +105,8 @@ > # else > # define W_EXITCODE(ret, sig) ((ret)

Re: Add internal definitions to derived forms

> On 24 Jan 2023, at 10:02, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > > Hi! > > lloda skribis: > @lisp -(@var{test} @var{body} @dots{}) +(@var{test} @var{body}) >>> >>> I think removing dots is incorrect here because it suggests, according >>> to the typographic conventions used in the

Re: GNU Guile 3.0.9rc1 available for testing!

Ludovic Courtès writes: > My understanding is that the expectation of being able to later mprotect > that mapping to make it writable is a valid one per POSIX. Quoth > : > > If PROT_WRITE is specified, the application

Re: [PATCHv3] Extensions for SRFI-171 (Transducers)

Hi Colin, Colin Woodbury skribis: > Sorry if I wasn't clear - I have alright assigned copyright to the FSF > (about 1.5 years ago). Things should be good to go, unless I've > misunderstood. I checked the records on fencepost.gnu.org and AFAICS, you assigned copyright for Emacs only (copyright

Re: Add internal definitions to derived forms

Hi! lloda skribis: >>> @lisp >>> -(@var{test} @var{body} @dots{}) >>> +(@var{test} @var{body}) >> >> I think removing dots is incorrect here because it suggests, according >> to the typographic conventions used in the document, that there can only >> be a single expression. [...] > This was