Bruce Korb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> - 40 if (gh_inexact_p(typ )) return GH_TYPE_INEXACT;
> <<=== throws error
Collateral damage from the change to scm_inexact_p (other message).
Not sure how one or both ought to work.
___
Gu
Bruce Korb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> ERROR: Wrong type argument in position 1: #
Ah, I see 1.7 now throws an error for a non-number argument to
inexact?, where 1.6 would accept anything.
Looks like a deliberate change "2003-11-19 Marius Vollmer", maybe he
can say what motivated it.
__
Bruce Korb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> port = scm_mkstrport( SCM_INUM0, expr, SCM_OPN | SCM_RDNG, zEx );
scm_open_input_string is probably easier.
> pt->line_number = line - 1;
> pt->file_name = file;
Maybe scm_set_port_line_x and scm_set_port_filename_x instead of
Hi Rob et al.,
Now for something completely different. Obviously, I have not yet
updated my code to figure out what sort of thing it is that I got
back from my eval call. Nevertheless, my understanding was that
you ought to be able to call WHATEVER_p with any bit pattern and
have it say, "Yes,
Bruce Korb wrote:
Hi,
I am completely certain that this makes sense to you. To me, it does
not. If I call ``scm_read(port)'' I have to attach the input file
as a port. That read function reads an s-expr. How can that work if
the non-Scheme text in the file is not an s-expr? I don't see anot
Ludovic Courtès wrote:
Hi,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
2005-11-17 Ludovic Courtès <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* gc-card.c (scm_i_card_statistics): Return if BITVEC is NULL.
This was typically hit when running `gc-live-object-stats' right
after starting Guile
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 02:35 pm, Rob Browning wrote:
> >SCM res = scm_call_3 (proc, str, file, line);
> >// Let's forget columns -- we don't have scm_call_4.
>
> Actually it looks like there is a scm_call_4.
OK. Let's put it in the doc then, too. :-)
> > I'll give this a spin
Bruce Korb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> With the final piece being the C code:
>
>SCM proc = scm_c_eval_string ("eval-string-from-file");
This is probably fine, but you might also want to try the
scm_c_module_lookup function(s). They should be a little bit more
efficient:
SCM proc = s
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 11:00 am, Rob Browning wrote:
> If so, then I wondered if it might be possible to just implement the
> function mentioned originally
> i.e. ag_scm_c_eval_string_from_file_line, and here's what I came up
> with. Note that I have no idea if this will actually work; I ha
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> If you want to use source locations in a Guile-friendly way (so that
> Guile can, for instance, display location information in
> backtraces), then you may want to use `scm_set_source_property_x
> (sexp, key, datum)' (where KEY may be one of SCM_SYM_FI
Bruce Korb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> *Thank you*, Ludvic! Now we're getting some where. :-D
Cool. ;-)
> So, again, I need clarity. Are you saying this:
First, the `scm_sym_*' things should be lower-case (I was using the GNU
notation for function arguments).
It's more complicated than th
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 08:04 am, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
*Thank you*, Ludvic! Now we're getting some where. :-D
> That the input file does not contain only Scheme source wasn't clear to
> me.
What I am doing is extracting Scheme code from an encompassing
template and handing it off fo
Bruce Korb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That read function reads an s-expr. How can that work if
> the non-Scheme text in the file is not an s-expr? I don't see another
> function for getting text from a port. Am I missing something?
> Especially troubling is the phrase, "Any whitespace before
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 06:44 am, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Bruce Korb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Because the file is mostly *NOT* scheme.
>
> I did say that you could use "Scheme constructs", "be it from Scheme
> o[r] C code". In other words, you can either write `(read)' in a piece
Bruce Korb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Because the file is mostly *NOT* scheme.
I did say that you could use "Scheme constructs", "be it from Scheme
o[r] C code". In other words, you can either write `(read)' in a piece
of Scheme code, or call `scm_read ()' from your C code: both are
strictly
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 05:46 am, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Bruce Korb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Well, okay, I don't find the stuff obvious. With effort, I'm sure
> > I could puzzle it out. I have never found Lisp to be inherently
> > "obvious".
>
> Oh, but things are different her
Bruce Korb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well, okay, I don't find the stuff obvious. With effort, I'm sure
> I could puzzle it out. I have never found Lisp to be inherently
> "obvious".
Oh, but things are different here: this is Scheme! ;-)
Just out of curiosity: why are you writing Scheme if
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 12:39 am, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi Bruce,
>
> Bruce Korb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > *I* certainly cannot.
>
> Do you mean that you don't *want* to, or that this is not possible?
Well, okay, I don't find the stuff obvious. With effort, I'm sure
I could pu
Hi,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> 2005-11-17 Ludovic Courtès <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * gc-card.c (scm_i_card_statistics): Return if BITVEC is NULL.
> This was typically hit when running `gc-live-object-stats' right
> after starting Guile.
Can this be applied?
Hi Bruce,
Bruce Korb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> *I* certainly cannot.
Do you mean that you don't *want* to, or that this is not possible?
The point is that writing Scheme code will always be easier than writing
C code, and maintaining it will be even more easier.
> And I do not understand t
20 matches
Mail list logo
