Re: wip-rtl status

2012-06-05 Thread Andy Wingo
On Mon 04 Jun 2012 23:12, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com skribis: However something like '(1 . (2 . ())) has two pairs: the tail which has two immediates, and the head that has an immediate in the car but a pointer in the cdr. In that case you need to

Re: Separate textual/binary ports vs. mixed ports

2012-06-05 Thread Daniel Krueger
Hey, I think if you only use them seperate there's a clearer distinction. If you have it mixed you can do some, say hacking, where you see it works but you can't see anywhere what you're exactly doing, most of it is hidden in the guile implementation, which interprets

Re: Separate textual/binary ports vs. mixed ports

2012-06-05 Thread Noah Lavine
I agree that separate binary and textual ports are cleaner, but what about using a port to deal with a mixed binary/textual protocol, like HTTP? I think the cleanest way to deal with that would be to have a port where you first read characters and then read binary data. That doesn't directly

Re: Separate textual/binary ports vs. mixed ports

2012-06-05 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi, Daniel Krueger keen...@googlemail.com skribis: If you have it mixed you can do some, say hacking, where you see it works but you can't see anywhere what you're exactly doing, most of it is hidden in the guile implementation, which interprets %default-port-conversion-strategy and gives

Re: Separate textual/binary ports vs. mixed ports

2012-06-05 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi! Noah Lavine noah.b.lav...@gmail.com skribis: I agree that separate binary and textual ports are cleaner, but what about using a port to deal with a mixed binary/textual protocol, like HTTP? I think the cleanest way to deal with that would be to have a port where you first read characters