Hi,
David Séverin lpce@gmail.com writes:
Don't you think that the 'using thread' on debian [and other distro?]
shouldn't be
solved before to call a release '2.xx'?
That Debian builds Guile --without-threads is a Debian-specific problem.
The fact that Guile with and without threads
Neil Jerram neiljer...@googlemail.com writes:
2009/1/10 Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com:
is load-extension expected to deal with this, and perhaps the problem
is a stray .so in a call that shouldn't be there?
I would guess that it is libltdl's job to know that the correct suffix
on MacOS is
Hello!
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
Licensing would be another thing to look at when merging the vm
branch -- currently it's under GPL + exception. Kei is still
contactable though, I have his mail somewhere. If Kei has already signed
papers we can just relicense it ourselves, however.
2009/1/12 Ludovic Courtès l...@gnu.org:
Hello!
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
Licensing would be another thing to look at when merging the vm
branch -- currently it's under GPL + exception. Kei is still
contactable though, I have his mail somewhere. If Kei has already signed
papers we
Hi Neil,
Why did you remove GDS breakpoints? The idea sounded nice:
While they are an important piece of infrastructure, and directly
usable in some scenarios, traps are still too low level to meet some
of the requirements of interactive development.
A common scenario is that a
2009/1/12 Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com:
Hi Neil,
Hi Andy,
Why did you remove GDS breakpoints? The idea sounded nice:
I think because the implementation as was was confusing too many things:
- the idea of being able to specify (in Scheme terms) where a
breakpoint ought to be, equally before or
Neil Jerram neiljer...@googlemail.com writes:
Yes, something else on my todo list. It's looking like an easy
decision, though, since nobody replied to say that they have of know
of a GPLv2-only application. We should announce it more formally, but
I think we can assume that Guile v2 will be
Hi Guilers,
We recently announced (below) that we were looking at changing Guile's
license to LGPLv3+, and asked if anyone knew of any GPLv2-only
applications that this would cause a problem for.
There were no responses; therefore the plan as of now is that Guile v2
(i.e. the next major release,
2009/1/12 Ludovic Courtès l...@gnu.org:
Hello,
Neil Jerram neiljer...@googlemail.com writes:
That's good, but I think I didn't explain the possible problem fully,
i.e. that the substitute won't work. Because of how Guile saves and
restores continuations (by copying the stack), and how it
2009/1/12 Neil Jerram neiljer...@googlemail.com:
2009/1/12 Ludovic Courtès l...@gnu.org:
Hello,
Neil Jerram neiljer...@googlemail.com writes:
That's good, but I think I didn't explain the possible problem fully,
i.e. that the substitute won't work. Because of how Guile saves and
restores
Hi Ken,
Thanks for your reply.
Ken Raeburn raeb...@raeburn.org writes:
There's no portable way, but it might be a bit more likely to happen
if you try something like:
union {
scm_t_cell cell[2];
double d_for_alignment;
long long ll_for_alignment;
}
The issue with this is that
Hi!
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
I modified snarf.h in the BDW-GC branch to transparently have all
`SCM_SYMBOL ()' invocations use a statically allocated stringbuf. The
symbol itself still has to be interned then so for simplicity the
implementation statically allocates an
12 matches
Mail list logo
