On 13.11.2023 15:21, 無無 wrote:
> I have read that in R7RS a library name is defined as:
>
> -> ( + )
> -> |
> ->
> ->
> -> 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9
>
> That means that a valid library name would be something like (a b 1),
> where "1" is a valid library
On 30.10.2023 11:24, Ramin Honary wrote:
> Hello Guile developers:
>
> I have come to realize that there are several finalized SRFIs
> published by John Cowan and others, for example, SRFI-133 (vector
> library), SRFI-125 (intermediate hash tables), SRFI-126 (R6RS-based
> hash tables) that were
On 26.09.2023 10:17, Taylan Kammer wrote:
>
> https://github.com/TaylanUB/scheme-srfis
>
> (I've not yet had time to migrate away from GitHub. Sorry.)
>
Fixed:
https://codeberg.org/taylan/scheme-srfis
--
Taylan
Re. issues with the standard SRFI 64 implementation, let me point out
that I've written an alternative implementation with cleaner code and
behavior of the default test runner; it's part of this (currently
dormant) project:
https://github.com/TaylanUB/scheme-srfis
(I've not yet had time to
On 12.09.2022 09:42, Damien Mattei wrote:
>
> Hello,
> i can not find in the scheme community a definition of 'case in term of macro
> as for when, unless,while,do... does anyone have it?
> thanks,
> Damien
The RnRS often contain such definitions. The following is taken from
R7RS-small:
On 03.08.2022 11:50, Jean Abou Samra wrote:
>
>
>> Le 3 août 2022 à 11:49, Taylan Kammer a écrit :
>>
>> On 03.08.2022 11:12, Damien Mattei wrote:
>>> GNU Guile 3.0.1
>>> Copyright (C) 1995-2020 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>>>
>>&g
On 03.08.2022 11:12, Damien Mattei wrote:
> GNU Guile 3.0.1
> Copyright (C) 1995-2020 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>
> Guile comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY; for details type `,show w'.
> This program is free software, and you are welcome to redistribute it
> under certain conditions; type
On 17.12.2021 16:48, Olivier Dion wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Dec 2021, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Olivier Dion skribis:
>>
>>> I would also like to contribute in some meaningful way. In what way
>>> someone with none wizard knowledge of Scheme can contribute the most to the
>>> project?
>>
>>
On 15.12.2021 11:20, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
> While Andy focuses on major improvements to the compiler and VM with a
> long-term vision, I think it would be great to also have people on the
> maintainer team focusing on more day-to-day operations: incremental
> improvements, bug fixes, etc. I
On 09.10.2021 14:01, Andrew Goh wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> I was wondering if the GNU Guile development team had thought of implementing
> a GNU Guile version for Microsoft Windows operating systems (Win 10, 11), to
> be used as a plug-in on JetBrains Intellij IDEA Ultimate, Community IDE
Responding to myself:
On 23.09.2021 22:27, Taylan Kammer wrote:
> I can't seem to find syntax-local-binding in Guile 2.2 or 3.0. Did you
> have to import some special module, or are you using another version?
Worked when I imported (system syntax internal).
> Either way,
On 23.09.2021 19:27, Damien Mattei wrote:
> yes i know parsing the whole code is the only portable solution, but it is
> slow,even on a few dozen of lines the slowing is visible ,so i can even think
> of that on one thousand lines...
>
> I finally succeed in Guile with simple piece of code to
On 22.09.2021 23:52, William ML Leslie wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Sep 2021, 4:51 am Taylan Kammer, <mailto:taylan.kam...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> On 22.09.2021 11:53, Damien Mattei wrote:
> > i already do it this way for internal defines ,using a recursive macro
> th
On 22.09.2021 11:53, Damien Mattei wrote:
> i already do it this way for internal defines ,using a recursive macro that
> build a list of variable using an accumulator. It can works but macro
> expansion seems slow, it was not immediate at compilation on a little example
> (oh nothing more that
On 19.09.2021 09:54, Damien Mattei wrote:
> hello,
> i'm developing an extension to Scheme
> and i need a procedure or macro that define a variable only if it is not bind
> and if it is just set! it.
>
> I can not do it in Guile or any Scheme,and i'm desperately searching a way to
> do that. I
On 07.08.2021 23:19, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 07, 2021 at 12:31:09PM +0200, Taylan Kammer wrote:
>> One consideration is how this should behave in the case of
>> bytevectors that were created from an FFI pointer [...]
>
> Hm. I don't understand. Realloc /ma
On 07.08.2021 13:09, Maxime Devos wrote:
>
> A problem is that this prevents optimisations and can currently
> introduce bugs in concurrent code. Consider the following code:
>
> [... snip ... ]
>
> Greetings,
> Maxime.
>
Couldn't we just state that resizing a vector/bytevector is a
On 06.08.2021 16:33, Vijay Marupudi wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I was curious if Guile would be willing to provide a series of
> new procedures for resizing contiguous memory regions.
>
> (bytevector-resize! new-size [fill])
> (vector-resize! new-size [fill])
>
> The [fill] parameter could be used if
On 11.05.2021 21:14, Taylan Kammer wrote:
>
> And here's another minimally changed one.
>
Aaaand another of course. on IRC notified me that
there's a way in which both the old and new implementation don't
conform to the standard: they're supposed to uninstall the default
te
I was just skimming through the bug tracker and noticed:
https://bugs.gnu.org/21181
This bug doesn't exist in the proposed implementation.
- Taylan
On 11.05.2021 13:32, Taylan Kammer wrote:
>
> Here's a fixed patch-set.
>
And here's another minimally changed one. Sorry about the noise,
but you know how it goes: you publish something to the public, and
soon after notice another edge or two to polish. :-)
The module defini
On 10.05.2021 20:25, Taylan Kammer wrote:
>
> - Improved expand-time performance for large test suites
>
I thought it would be a good idea to quantify this, so I
benchmarked the compilation performance of a test suite
of 289 tests (that of the scheme-bytsetructures library)
2001
From: Taylan Kammer
Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 15:23:17 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Use a different SRFI-64 implementation.
* module/srfi/srfi-64.scm: Add imports and other boilerplate for new
implementation.
* module/srfi/srfi-64/execution.body.scm: New file.
* module/srfi/srfi-64/source
Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Taylan Kammer
Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 18:12:34 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Improve support for R6/R7 SRFI module name formats.
Fixes <https://bugs.gnu.org/39601>.
Partly fixes <https://bugs.gnu.org/40371>.
It was already possible to import an SRFI module by r
On 22.10.2020 20:24, Taylan Kammer wrote:
I think the following discrepancy should probably be fixed:
$ guile -L ~/src/scheme/bytestructures/
guile> ,use (scheme eval)
guile> (eval '(cond-expand (lp64 #t) (else #f))
(environment '(guile) ; <=== DIFFER
I think the following discrepancy should probably be fixed:
$ guile -L ~/src/scheme/bytestructures/
guile> ,use (scheme eval)
guile> (eval '(cond-expand (lp64 #t) (else #f))
(environment '(guile) ; <=== DIFFERENCE HERE
'(bytestructures guile
(Duplicate of the mail I sent to guile-devel before realizing you're not
on the list.)
> (defmacro define-session (name value)
> (define (inner n v)
> (set! decl
> (cons
> (make-var n v)
> decl))
> )
> `(,inner ',name ,value))
The problem here is that the
> (defmacro define-session (name value)
> (define (inner n v)
> (set! decl
> (cons
> (make-var n v)
> decl))
> )
> `(,inner ',name ,value))
The problem here is that the macro output
`(,inner ',name ,value)
would include a # object, because it evaluates
Many thanks to everyone for this amazing release. :-)
> ** Add support for R7RS
Given the now official R7RS support, let me remind people of this repo:
https://github.com/TaylanUB/scheme-srfis/
Development is inactive, but patches, merge requests, or forks/takeovers
are welcome.
I think
During the R7RS-small discussion, I remember Will Clinger suggesting to
keep (eqv? proc1 proc2) => #t but unspecifying it for eq?. Would that
help in Guile's case? I don't remember the exact optimization he
suggested this for.
- Taylan
On 14.01.2020 17:47, Mikael Djurfeldt wrote:
> It might
On 03.01.2020 19:30, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
> Should the #:re-export clause propagate the replace bit, or should
> it not? :-)
The 2.9.8 release notes say one should use #:re-export-and-replace for
this use-case.
Happy new year!
Taylan
On 20.10.2019 05:08, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> Taylan Kammer writes:
>> I'm mostly fond of the Contributor Covenant that was adopted by Guix
>
> I suggest that we postpone discussion of this proposal for now. It
> might create more divisions between us, at a time when we s
Stefan Israelsson Tampe writes:
> Hi all, I'm trying to make a python clone in guile. Currently the code is
> slow and one of the reasons is the following,
>
> in my pythoon
>
> return 1,2
>
> returns a (values 1 2) in order to get python and scheme to interoperate. but
> for python if you
33 matches
Mail list logo