Re: association lists

On Fri, 22 Apr 2022, 7:46 am Stefan Israelsson Tampe, < stefan.ita...@gmail.com> wrote: > This is a nice idea for to hash tables for 0-256 elements (perhaps even > 512) > > http://itampe.com/category/computers.html > Hi Stis, This is a very cool layout, especially getting to take advantage of

Re: new function

On Thu, 23 Sep 2021, 4:51 am Taylan Kammer, wrote: > 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

Re: new function

You could do it the same way python does it: have `def` be a macro that inspects its body for assignments to symbols, and then let-bind them at the top of the function. On Wed, 22 Sep 2021, 6:45 pm Damien Mattei, wrote: > Hi Taylan, > > i have used Module System Reflection, and it works almost

Re: New module proposal: argp

On Tue, 28 Apr 2020, 8:28 pm Arne Babenhauserheide, wrote: > Hi Dale, > > I would like to see an easier way to parse arguments, but I did not yet > find > something that’s on-par with the argparse module in Python. > > Best wishes, > Arne > The Python world seem mostly enamoured with click.

Re: call with value

On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 at 02:59, Stefan Israelsson Tampe wrote: > > I have this (on guile 3.0.0), > > (define (f x) (call-with-values (lambda () x) (case-lambda ((x) ...) (x > ...) > > and the code does not simplify to (define (f x) x), why? > > It would be great to have guile optimize this as

Re: Removal of hppa support

On Sun, 26 Jan 2020 at 20:51, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > > Hi! > > On 1/26/20 6:46 AM, William ML Leslie wrote: > > On Sun, 26 Jan 2020, 8:20 am John Paul Adrian Glaubitz, > > mailto:glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de>> wrote: > > > > Hi Andy! >

Re: Removal of hppa support

On Sun, 26 Jan 2020, 4:46 pm William ML Leslie, < william.leslie@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jan 2020, 8:20 am John Paul Adrian Glaubitz, < > glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote: > >> Hi Andy! >> >> I noticed that you recently purged hppa support

Re: Removal of hppa support

On Sun, 26 Jan 2020, 8:20 am John Paul Adrian Glaubitz, < glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote: > Hi Andy! > > I noticed that you recently purged hppa support from guile [1]. > This change does not remove hppa support from guile, only support for the jit. As an ia64 user, i'm a bit sad that we

Re: multi-lingual guile: language strictness

On 14 July 2018 at 12:57, Brett Gilio wrote: > Is this possibility for making Guile multi-lingual a promised feature, > or more of a wishlist type thing? I'll have to think about some ways > that might be good to approach this, because the limiting > volunteer-community is definitely going to be

Re: multi-lingual guile: language strictness

On 14 July 2018 at 12:53, Matt Wette wrote: > Hi All, > > I posed a question on #guile IRC last weekend asking for use cases for > making Guile > multi-lingual. The use case that came up was the desire to use Guile as an > extension > that supports multiple languages for users. To that end, I

Re: Auto compile from many different languages that interoperates with guile

On 9 September 2017 at 08:25, Stefan Israelsson Tampe wrote: > def gen(l): > def f(x): > yield(gen) x > Whoa. You're yielding from a different frame?! -- William Leslie Notice: Likely much of this email is, by the nature of copyright, covered under

Re: Auto compile from many different languages that interoperates with guile

On 8 September 2017 at 11:39, William ML Leslie <william.leslie@gmail.com> wrote: > https://docs.python.org/3/library/importlib.html#module-importlib > Hmm I could have said something similar about Java's classloaders or OSGi or E's eMakers (eMakers are even better, though requi

Re: Auto compile from many different languages that interoperates with guile

On 2 September 2017 at 06:45, Stefan Israelsson Tampe wrote: > form is either specified or current-language and what I propose is to add a > knob that enables another version of the default for from e.g. something > like the following. > > (define %extension-map '((("py"

Re: anyone define port types?

On 23 June 2016 at 20:43, Andy Wingo wrote: > On Thu 23 Jun 2016 11:24, Chris Vine writes: >> Secondly, as I understand it in the end you want pre-emptive "green" >> threads for guile, whereas my code equates to co-operative >> multi-tasking, whilst

Re: anyone define port types?

On 20 June 2016 at 06:09, Chris Vine wrote: > OK I am grateful for your patience in explaining this. I need to think > about it, but while this works where all events come from user-derived > events, I doubt that this would work with guile-gnome and the glib main >

Re: Announcing 8sync: an asynchronous programming language for Guile

On 6 December 2015 at 01:58, Christopher Allan Webber wrote: > Amirouche Boubekki writes: >> 8sync has two types of async-request: >> >> ** run-requests, which implements kind of a *coroutine* behavior. >> >> It pause the execution of the current procedure and schedule >>

Re: [PATCH] Added Artanis info to new main page

On 5 November 2015 at 20:58, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > GDB! What would the associated picture be? A brass clockwork cockroach! -- William Leslie Notice: Likely much of this email is, by the nature of copyright, covered under copyright law. You absolutely MAY reproduce any part

Re: Verifying Toolchain Semantics

On 6 October 2014 11:30, Ian Grant ian.a.n.gr...@googlemail.com wrote: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2014-10/msg00016.html From:William ML Leslie Date:Mon, 6 Oct 2014 00:57:49 +1100 On 3 October 2014 22:56, Taylan Ulrich Bayirli/Kammer address@hidden wrote: Say

Re: Verifying Toolchain Semantics

On 3 October 2014 22:56, Taylan Ulrich Bayirli/Kammer taylanbayi...@gmail.com wrote: William ML Leslie william.leslie@gmail.com writes: ​Oh, interesting point. Maybe we should define PDF as an abstract semantics that we can convert into a wide range of equivalent document layout

Re: Verifying Toolchain Semantics

On 3 October 2014 16:23, Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org wrote: Instead, he insists to distribute them in an opaque format that can only be interpreted by a small handful of very complex programs with a large attack surface. ​Oh, interesting point. Maybe we should define PDF as an abstract

Re: Dijkstra's Methodology for Secure Systems Development

I wasn't really sure if I should reply to this thread again, but I guess I should clear up some of my thoughts and experiences here. On 20 September 2014 22:46, Taylan Ulrich Bayirli/Kammer taylanbayi...@gmail.com wrote: Panicz Maciej Godek godek.mac...@gmail.com writes: [...] the back doors

Re: Dijkstra's Methodology for Secure Systems Development

On 20 September 2014 18:50, Panicz Maciej Godek godek.mac...@gmail.com wrote: ​​ And I still find it difficult to see anything terrible in the idea that FSF had been subverted, when I interpret that in terms of software security, because the way I see it, the main premise of FSF movement is

Re: GNU Thunder

On 6 September 2014 11:40, Ian Grant ian.a.n.gr...@googlemail.com wrote: The problem is this: it is impossible to bootstrap the GNU tool-chain from scratch because it's all written in C, and C is too complex a language to use for a definitional interpreter. So we always rely on the semantics

Re: GNU Thunder

On 7 September 2014 01:49, Ian Grant ian.a.n.gr...@googlemail.com wrote: You are just not at all convincing, I'm afraid. Tell your boss they didn't train you properly, and can you get assigned somewhere else. ​Unfortunately, this is a reality we have to deal with when discussing security on

Re: Reinterpreting the compiler source code

On 5 September 2014 03:33, Ian Grant ian.a.n.gr...@googlemail.com wrote: This is only the tip of the ice-burg; and the less evidence I see that people are properly addressing this 'issue', the more of these 'suggestions' I will publish over the next few days. I would be much more interested in

Re: return value of `string-set!'

On 15 August 2013 08:33, Alexandru Cojocaru xo...@gmx.com wrote: Hi, currently `string-set!' returns an unspecified value. What about making it return `str' instead? Functions whose specific purpose is to mutate the provided value usually don't return the value because that is a common source

Re: take! 0==1?

On 12 July 2013 17:14, Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org wrote: Hi, Reading the documentation of take! -- Scheme Procedure: take lst i -- Scheme Procedure: take! lst i Return a list containing the first I elements of LST. `take!' may modify the structure of the

Re: take! 0==1?

On 12 July 2013 17:14, Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org wrote: Hi, Reading the documentation of take! -- Scheme Procedure: take lst i -- Scheme Procedure: take! lst i Return a list containing the first I elements of LST. `take!' may modify the structure of the

Re: order of evaluation

On 18 June 2013 06:14, Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com wrote: If I understand correctly, I think this is going in the wrong abstractive direction -- CPS is nice because it's a limpid medium for program transformations that also corresponds neatly to runtime. With this sort of thing we'd be moving

Re: CPS Update

On 20 February 2013 03:21, Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org wrote: (define (func x) (let ((r (my-special-function x))) (+ x 2 r))) Here, (my-special-function x) must be evaluated before evaluating '+'. Evaluating '+' means to fetch the value stored in the location denoted by '+'.

Re: Dynamic FFI vs Static FFI (was Re: About Guile crypto support)

On 13 February 2013 05:24, Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org wrote: Okay, but here I'm using Static FFI to mean something very different than the C API: I'm talking about a pure scheme-based API that would be quite similar to the API our current dynamic FFI, except that a lot of the work would be

Re: Will guile support R7RS terminating equal? in the presence of cycle?

On 9 September 2012 13:41, Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org wrote: Another option is to use the method described in Efficient Nondestructive Equality Checking for Trees and Graphs by Adams and Dybvig. http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~dyb/pubs/equal.pdf Mark The 'interleave' algorithm there looks

Re: Running non-scheme scripts: some thoughts

On 12 July 2012 13:12, nalaginrut nalagin...@gmail.com wrote: Personally I would think that having Guile guess by extension would be the, in most cases, most reliable. Otherwise there could be problems loading several files in different languages etc. Yes, my vote is gussing by extension. But

Re: TODO list for Guile R7RS support

On 13 February 2012 10:57, Alex Shinn alexsh...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Ludovic Courtès l...@gnu.org wrote: Alex Shinn alexsh...@gmail.com skribis: There is no gnu feature proposed in R7RS, That would be for GNU, aka. GNU/Hurd. Wouldn't the feature be better named

Re: New feature proposal: Support C-code inline?

On 23 April 2011 14:24, nalaginrut nalagin...@gmail.com wrote: I think this simple solution could be a temporary substitute before a AOT guile-compiler come out. To myself, I really want to use a AOT compiler to do such a job(it's better for optimizing the code). Just to clear up a seemingly