Re: bug#56867: [PATCH] download: Do not wrap TLS port on GnuTLS >= 3.7.7.

On Thu, 04 Aug 2022 16:20:12 +0200 Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Ludovic Courtès skribis: > > > The custom input/output port wrapping the TLS session record port would > > introduce overhead, and it would also prevent its uses in a non-blocking > > context--e.g., with Fibers. The port close

Re: GNU Guile 3.0.8 released

On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 19:03:17 +0100 Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > Aleix Conchillo Flaqué writes: > > On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 3:05 AM Maxime Devos wrote: > > > >> Andy Wingo schreef op vr 11-02-2022 om 08:47 [+0100]: > >> > We are delighted to announce GNU Guile release 3.0.8, the latest in the > >>

Re: (web server) serving on both ipv6 and ipv4?

On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:44:13 + Chris Vine wrote: > On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:07:33 + > Chris Vine wrote: > [snip] > > As I understand it, with linux IPv6 sockets are dual stack capable, and > > in earlier kernel versions this was be enabled by default. I believe >

Re: (web server) serving on both ipv6 and ipv4?

On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:44:13 + Chris Vine wrote: > By the way I did use dual stack some years ago, and I cannot now > remember all the details, but I think I may have had to bind on > in6addr_any (which in dual stack would cover I

Re: (web server) serving on both ipv6 and ipv4?

On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 13:07:33 + Chris Vine wrote: [snip] > As I understand it, with linux IPv6 sockets are dual stack capable, and > in earlier kernel versions this was be enabled by default. I believe > with current versions that is no longer the case, and that you have to >

Re: (web server) serving on both ipv6 and ipv4?

On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 08:57:51 +0100 "Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide" wrote: > Hi, > > > with both fibers server and (web server) there is a split between IPv4 > and IPv6: > > IPv4: > > (fibers:run-server handler-with-path #:family AF_INET #:port port #:addr > INADDR_ANY) > > (run-server

Re: shlib major change from 3.0.3 to 3.0.4

On Sun, 13 Dec 2020 09:44:01 -0500 Greg Troxel wrote: > > I am packaging guile 3 in pkgsrc-wip. (It's not promoted to pkgsrc > proper because I am still having some issues.) > > Doing the update from 3.0.3 to 3.0.4 I found this change in install > files: > >

Re: GNU Guile 3.0.3 released

On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 23:04:03 +0200 Ludovic Courtès wrote: > We are delighted to announce GNU Guile release 3.0.3, the third bug-fix > release of the new 3.0 stable series. This release represents 170 > commits by 17 people since version 3.0.2. See the NEWS excerpt that > follows for full

Re: Better HTTPS support in (web client)

On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 15:49:49 +0100 Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Hello Guilers! > > I’ve pushed a ‘wip-https-client’ branch that contains improvements for > HTTPS support in (web client) that I’d like to be part of Guile 3: > > https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guile.git/log/?h=wip-https-client >

Re: GNU Guile 2.9.5 Released [beta]

On Mon, 06 Jan 2020 21:34:59 +0100 Andy Wingo wrote: > On Mon 06 Jan 2020 00:26, Chris Vine writes: > > I have a 'try' macro which adopts the approach that if an exception > > arises, the macro unwinds from the dynamic environment of the code > > where the exception

Re: GNU Guile 2.9.5 Released [beta]

On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 16:22:39 +0100 Andy Wingo wrote: > We are pleased to announce GNU Guile release 2.9.5. This is the fifth > pre-release of what will eventually become the 3.0 release series. [snip] > ** Reimplementation of exceptions > > Since Guile's origins 25 years ago, `throw' and

Re: guile 3 update, halloween edition

On Thu, 31 Oct 2019 17:20:37 +0100 Andy Wingo wrote: > Greets :) > > On Thu 31 Oct 2019 01:01, Chris Vine writes: > > > "Condition" is a strange word for describing structured error objects, > > I agree. However, I think it would be quite confusing to descri

Re: guile 3 update, halloween edition

On Wed, 30 Oct 2019 21:13:49 +0100 Andy Wingo wrote: > Also: should these structured error objects be named > exceptions or conditions? SRFI-35, R6RS, and R7RS say "conditions", but > racket and my heart say "exceptions"; wdyt? R6RS and R7RS speak of raising an exception, and handling the

Re: Immediate doubles (up to 2^256) and rationals coming to Guile 3

On Sat, 08 Jun 2019 11:46:10 +0200 Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: > Chris Vine writes: > > On Sat, 08 Jun 2019 10:07:45 +0200 > > Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: > > [snip] > >> Wow, I didn’t know that you could do that. > >> > >> However: "The

Re: Immediate doubles (up to 2^256) and rationals coming to Guile 3

On Sat, 08 Jun 2019 10:07:45 +0200 Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: [snip] > Wow, I didn’t know that you could do that. > > However: "The details of that allocation are implementation-defined, and > it's undefined behavior to read from the member of the union that wasn't > most recently written."

Re: [PATCH] Add current-suspendable-io-status parameter

On Wed, 15 May 2019 12:09:19 +0200 wrote: > On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 06:54:38PM +0800, Nala Ginrut wrote: > > Hi folks! > > Here's a patch to add current-suspendable-io-status: > > Its result is a pair: (finished-bytes . rest-bytes) > > Sorry for this possibly dumb question, but... is there a way

Re: Unexpectedly low read/write performance of open-pipe

On Tue, 09 Apr 2019 14:24:09 -0400 Mark H Weaver wrote: > Hi Chris, > Chris Vine writes: > > On Tue, 09 Apr 2019 04:35:38 -0400 > > Mark H Weaver wrote: > >> > >> I think it's probably fine for 2.2, although a more careful check should > >> be mad

Re: Unexpectedly low read/write performance of open-pipe

On Tue, 09 Apr 2019 04:35:38 -0400 Mark H Weaver wrote: > Hi Rob, > > Rob Browning writes: > > > Mark H Weaver writes: > > > >> See below for a draft reimplementation of the OPEN_BOTH mode of > >> open-pipe* based on R6RS custom binary input/output. On my machine it > >> increases the speed

Re: Incorrect documentation for system, system*, and/or waitpid?

On Sun, 14 Oct 2018 00:59:03 -0700 Chris Marusich wrote: > Hi Mark! > > Mark H Weaver writes: > > > When the manual says "exit status as returned by ‘waitpid’", it's > > referring to the "status value" portion of what 'waitpid' returns, > > i.e. the CDR of 'waitpid's return value. > > Thank

Re: c99 support

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:34:07 +0200 Hans Åberg wrote: > > On 29 Jun 2018, at 12:10, Chris Vine wrote: > > > >> For C++, these are only optional, cf. [1], as they require no padding. So > >> an alternative is to typedef the obligatory int_fast<2^k>_t

Re: c99 support

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 10:39:33 +0200 Hans Åberg wrote: > > On 29 Jun 2018, at 09:39, Andy Wingo wrote: > > > > It would seem that the first four > > features of C99 are OK for all platforms that we target, with the > > following caveats: > > > > * We should avoid using C++ keywords (e.g. throw)

Re: source and compiled file installtion locations

On Sat, 5 May 2018 21:03:14 -0300 David Pirotte wrote: > Hello Guilers, > > > 1- no --use-guile-site > > > > in this case, imo, locations should be > > > > $(datarootdir)/ [ source > > FWIW, > > This is what guile-gnome does, and it also does it in $(libdir), >

Re: Subprocess API.

On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 19:59:39 +0100 Chris Vine <vine35792...@gmail.com> wrote: > ... you could consider launching the new process in C code via the > guile FFI so you can ensure that no non-async-signal-safe code is > called at the wrong time; but presumably you would still have

Re: Subprocess API.

On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 19:14:22 +0200 Mathieu Othacehe wrote: > Hi Chris, > > > This works exactly as you would expect from its POSIX equivalents > > and has the advantage that you can read from the pipe as the > > sub-process is proceeding rather than just collect at the end.

Re: Subprocess API.

On Sat, 23 Sep 2017 11:58:34 +0200 Mathieu Othacehe wrote: > Hi, > > I recently used "open-pipe*" to launch a process but was unable to > read from stderr. This subject was already discussed on this ml > here : > >

Re: fork pipe dup2 exec

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 09:56:58 -0400 "Thompson, David" wrote: > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Tobias Reithmaier > wrote: > > Hello, > > > > is there a way to program a Inter Process Communication (IPC) in > > guile like you do it with the

Re: [PATCH] Re: Patchset related to array functions

On Sat, 16 Jul 2016 11:07:40 +0200 Andy Wingo wrote: [snip] > I would like stdint.h though :) I agree. stdint.h is required by C++11, Appendix D5, to be available in C++11 and later, with the same meaning as in C99, but in practice it was available before then. It is provided

Re: [PATCH] Re: Patchset related to array functions

On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 17:41:45 +0200 Daniel Llorens wrote: [snip] > I think we'd want C89/C90 users to still be able to #include > . Dunno. libguile.h can also at present be included in C++89/03/11/14 code by design - all the necessary "extern C" stuff is there. I would

Re: anyone define port types?

On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 09:36:48 +0200 Andy Wingo wrote: [snip] > Excellent. Though I think that eventually we will want to bless one > of these concurrency patterns as the default one, we're a long way > away from that, and even if we do bless one I think we will always > want to

Re: anyone define port types?

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 10:01:57 +0100 Chris Vine <ch...@cvine.freeserve.co.uk> wrote: > On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 09:34:26 +0200 > Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> wrote: > [snip] > > I must not be communicating clearly because this is definitely not > > what I am propo

Re: anyone define port types?

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 09:34:26 +0200 Andy Wingo wrote: [snip] > I must not be communicating clearly because this is definitely not > what I am proposing. The prompt doesn't service anything, and it's > just the one user-space thread which is suspended, and when it > suspends, it

Re: anyone define port types?

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 13:38:39 +1000 William ML Leslie <william.leslie@gmail.com> wrote: > On 20 June 2016 at 06:09, Chris Vine <ch...@cvine.freeserve.co.uk> > wrote: > > OK I am grateful for your patience in explaining this. I need to > > think about it, but whi

Re: anyone define port types?

On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 19:48:03 +0200 Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> wrote: > On Sun 19 Jun 2016 17:33, Chris Vine <ch...@cvine.freeserve.co.uk> > writes: > > > The answer I have adopted when reading from TCP sockets is to > > extract individual bytes only from

Re: anyone define port types?

On Sun, 19 Jun 2016 11:13:17 +0200 Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> wrote: > Hi :) > > On Sun 12 Jun 2016 10:25, Chris Vine <ch...@cvine.freeserve.co.uk> > writes: > > >> > >> http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/docs/master/guile.html/Input-and-

Re: anyone define port types?

On Sat, 11 Jun 2016 19:02:09 +0200 Andy Wingo wrote: > On Thu 14 Apr 2016 16:08, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > > > Andy Wingo skribis: > > > >> I am working on improving our port implementation to take > >> advantage of the opportunity to break ABI

Re: wip-ports-refactor

On Tue, 10 May 2016 16:30:30 +0200 Andy Wingo wrote: > I think we have no plans for giving up pthreads. The problem is that > like you say, if there is no shared state, and your architecture has a > reasonable memory model (Intel's memory model is really great to > program),

Re: wip-ports-refactor

On Wed, 06 Apr 2016 22:46:28 +0200 Andy Wingo wrote: > So, right now Guile has a pretty poor concurrency story. We just have > pthreads, which is great in many ways, but nobody feels like > recommending this to users. The reason is that when pthreads were > originally added to

Re: Asynchronous event loop brainstorm at FSF 30

On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 10:26:25 + Chris Vine <ch...@cvine.freeserve.co.uk> wrote: > On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 11:46:24 -0600 > Christopher Allan Webber <cweb...@dustycloud.org> wrote: > [snip] > > This sounds very interesting... is the source available? Could you >

Re: Asynchronous event loop brainstorm at FSF 30

On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 11:46:24 -0600 Christopher Allan Webber wrote: [snip] > This sounds very interesting... is the source available? Could you > point to it? > > Thanks! > - Chris No it's not. I'll email you something. Chris

Re: (list-head lst k) with k longer than (length lst)

On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 11:53:05 +0100 Jan Synáček wrote: > Hello, > > I'm getting: > > scheme@(guile-user)> (list-head '(1 2 3) 5) > ERROR: In procedure list-head: > ERROR: In procedure list-head: Wrong type argument in position 1 > (expecting pair): () > > This looks

Re: Reading data from a file descriptor

On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 13:52:21 +0100 <to...@tuxteam.de> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 12:59:56PM +, Chris Vine wrote: > > On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 10:53:19 +0100 > > [...] > > > guile's R6RS implem

Re: Reading data from a file descriptor

On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 10:53:19 +0100 wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 11:54:33AM +0100, Amirouche Boubekki wrote: > > On 2015-11-13 21:41, Jan Synáček wrote: > > [...] > > > >I have an open fd to a unix socket and I want to

Re: Asynchronous event loop brainstorm at FSF 30

On Sat, 03 Oct 2015 17:29:16 -0500 Christopher Allan Webber wrote: > So David Thompson, Mark Weaver, Andrew Engelbrecht and I sat down to > talk over how we might go about an asynchronous event loop in Guile > that might be fairly extensible. Here are some of what we

Re: port threadsafety redux

On Wed, 11 Feb 2015 22:23:43 +0100 Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com wrote: Hi! So, threads and ports again. We didn't really come to a resolution in this thread: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel/17023 To recap, in Guile 2.0 a port has mutable internal state that can be

async blocking function linking

Hi, guile-2.0's scm_c_call_with_blocked_asyncs, scm_c_call_with_unblocked_asyncs, scm_dynwind_block_asyncs and scm_dynwind_unblock_asyncs will not link for me using 32-bit ubuntu-14.04 (gcc-4.8.2/guile-2.0.9) or 32-bit slackware-14.1 (gcc-4.9.0/guile-2.0.11). I do not have a machine to test a

Re: clutter, clutter-glx [1.12.2] generating doc, 2 errors

On Sat, 12 Apr 2014 23:28:18 -0300 David Pirotte da...@altosw.be wrote: Hello, I'm on guile (GNU Guile) 2.0.11.2-0ece4 now Although I did not update the wrapset.api yet, in order to get a general picture of updating a clutter binding Provide a binding for clutter's