Hi Mike,
On Sun 21 Jun 2009 08:31, Mike Gran spk...@yahoo.com writes:
Not really in a position to help, since I'm still AFK, but,
somewhere along the line I pushed this patch to r6rs vectors
in the String_abstraction2 tree.
Took me a little while to understand it, but it seems the patch is
Hi Daniel,
On Sat 06 Jun 2009 18:05, Daniel Kraft d...@domob.eu writes:
I just re-pushed the brainfuck branch (but should contain not much new
as compared to the last push) after the savannah break-down. I think it
should have gotten right this time, too, but I again had to struggle a
bit
Hey all,
Awesome release, that! Of course there are still a number of bugs to
write and features to fix before 2.0, so we continue the onward journey
of monthly releases.
I propose that we make the next release on 15 July, to get back onto the
on-the-15th schedule. Let's have a 5-day freeze.
Hey all,
I'm pretty displeased about the way that the brainfuck compilation
works. Check this:
brainfuck@(guile-user) ,c ++]
(The trailing ] is to note the end of the program. It's kindof a hack,
but it works fine.)
Disassembly of #objcode b719c8e0:
0(make-int8:0)
On Mon 22 Jun 2009 06:24, Julian Graham jool...@gmail.com writes:
is there any chance there'll be a guile-lib release?
Just noticed that 1.6 doesn't play well with Guile 1.9.0 (looks like
syncase issues) but that the latest code from the guile-lib git repo
seems to work swimmingly.
I think
Hi,
Currently the bytevector docs are in the Simple data types section.
Would they not be a better fit in Compound data types, along with
uniform vectors c?
Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/
On Wed 24 Jun 2009 23:14, Neil Jerram n...@ossau.uklinux.net writes:
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
I propose that we make the next release on 15 July
Fine with me!
Me too.
Grand! Ludovic, if you don't mind, perhaps we can repeat the same
Hi,
On Thu 25 Jun 2009 00:39, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
Currently the bytevector docs are in the Simple data types section.
Would they not be a better fit in Compound data types, along with
uniform vectors c?
An argument in favor
be fine. I'll look and revert if necessary.
On Thu 25 Jun 2009 10:04, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
What I'm getting at is that I think we should have VM ops for working on
vectors -- both generic vectors, and specific ops for bytevectors
Why
Hi,
I've gone ahead and added vector and bytevector ops to the VM. That
should provide a considerable speedup to programs that use those data
structures.
As far as brainfuck goes:
On Wed 24 Jun 2009 14:03, Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
brainfuck@(guile-user) ,c ++]
brainfuck
Hi Neil!
On Fri 26 Jun 2009 00:47, Neil Jerram n...@ossau.uklinux.net writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
I don't have Neil's mail open here, but my thought was this: getting a
fast VM is a dark art of feeling and instinct, My feeling is that a VM
is fast if it fits in the CPU's
Hi szgyg,
On Sat 27 Jun 2009 15:36, szgyg sz...@ludens.elte.hu writes:
Andy Wingo wrote:
On Thu 18 Jun 2009 09:33, szgyg writes:
make[2]: Entering directory `/home/szgyg/src/GIT/guile/=build/module'
GUILE_AUTO_COMPILE=0 ../meta/uninstalled-env guile-tools compile -o
ice-9/psyntax-pp.go
Hi Julian,
On Sun 28 Jun 2009 02:20, Julian Graham jool...@gmail.com writes:
With the 1.9 series launched, I wanted to start thinking about R6RS
libraries again, since it would be awesome to have some semblance of
an implementation ready by October.
Yes!
I think such issues should lead us
On Mon 29 Jun 2009 23:44, Neil Jerram n...@ossau.uklinux.net writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
scheme@(guile-user) (if %nil 1 2)
1
#define scm_is_false(x) (scm_is_eq ((x), SCM_BOOL_F) || SCM_NILP (x))
Seems wrong to me. In Scheme #f should be the only false value
Hi,
On Tue 30 Jun 2009 00:23, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
+#define BV_FIXABLE_INT_REF(stem, fn_stem, type, size) \
+{ \
+ long i
On Sun 05 Jul 2009 03:41, Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org writes:
Below is a proposal for how to make boolean tests and end-of-list
tests faster and more compact, by renumbering the representations for
SCM_ELISP_NIL, SCM_EOL, SCM_UNDEFINED, and SCM_EOF_VAL.
That looks like great work, Mark!!
I
Hey folks :)
On Thu 18 Sep 2008 11:17, Neil Jerram neiljer...@googlemail.com writes:
In my view, this part is still useful:
You must take care to always unreserve an array after reserving it,
also in the presence of non-local exits. To simplify this, reserving
and unreserving work like a
Hi,
On Sun 05 Jul 2009 12:14, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
I'm hacking on this code right now, and have come to think that
scm_array_handle_release is superfluous. It shouldn't protect against
concurrent modification of the data, as that should
Hi,
On Mon 06 Jul 2009 21:30, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
Good question. I suppose you have this case in mind:
(define s0 (string foo))
(define s1 (substring/shared s0 0))
(define s2 (substring/shared s1 0))
(par-for-each (lambda
Hi,
On Thu 09 Jul 2009 22:08, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
To me this is a weak argument, especially given that much code probably
doesn't do the right thing in the presence of nonlocal exits.
To me, *this* is a weak argument. ;-)
Heh, allow me to elaborate then. Let's keep this
Heya,
On Wed 15 Jul 2009 09:24, Neil Jerram n...@ossau.uklinux.net writes:
I should apologize for lack of responsiveness over the last couple
weeks.
Me too; I've been decamping to France for the summer. I should be
more available from now on (for a while!).
All summer? I'm in France
Hi Daniel!
Reviewing (and merging as much as possible of) your elisp branch is my
next Guile task, after taking care of that bug recently reported by
Martin Ward. Should be short work at this point.
This is a little late, but fwiw...
On Thu 16 Jul 2009 15:47, Daniel Kraft d...@domob.eu writes:
Hi Daniel,
On Mon 20 Jul 2009 19:53, Daniel Kraft d...@domob.eu writes:
in the %nil thread a suggestion was brought up to support the `flet'
construct (and `flet*' as well, if we choose to do so at all, I favour)
in Guile's upcoming elisp implementation that behaves just like a let
for
Hi Ludovic,
This isn't a review really, because I changed the code in question... I
hope you find the new analyze-lexicals procedure easier to understand.
It's certainly better documented :)
On Thu 02 Jul 2009 19:35, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Hi,
Just for the record :)
On Thu 23 Jul 2009 18:13, Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org writes:
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 05:24:30PM +0200, Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
For the calls above all the dynamic accesses can be determined statically.
Lexical accesses can always be determined statically.
Hi szgyg,
I can't recall where we were with this.
1. psyntax-pp.scm sometimes regenerating itself
2. some kind of segfault related to stack sizes on cygwin
3. The following:
On Tue 07 Jul 2009 17:53, szgyg sz...@ludens.elte.hu writes:
That segfault was an fd_set overflow. We should
#define
On Wed 22 Jul 2009 11:11, Daniel Kraft d...@domob.eu writes:
And checks with the cl package's implementation of lexical-let give the
result, that an inner let does the same as if it was another
lexical-let; that is, does not revert to dynamic binding but rather sets
only the lexical value.
Hi Juhani,
On Thu 02 Jul 2009 17:49, Juhani Viheräkoski moonsh...@kapsi.fi writes:
With recent changes in guile vm there are lots on improvements on the
Gambit benchmarks.
Improvements compared to what?
I should have been more concise..
You were concise, but not precise ;-)
So here's
On Fri 03 Jul 2009 17:32, Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org writes:
It might be worth considering a build-time option to disable %nil, so
that it's possible to build a version of guile which doesn't pay this
price.
You probably found it, but Guile does have such an option.
(Jeez, I didn't think
On Tue 14 Jul 2009 17:15, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Note to Andy: the GCS recommends against assignments in `if' expressions
(info (standards)Syntactic Conventions). :-)
Ooooh, bummer. I've grown to like these :)
I also like the comma operator :)
Anyway, will avoid in the
On Fri 03 Jul 2009 02:04, Andreas Rottmann a.rottm...@gmx.at writes:
Playing around with Guile's now-in-core syntax-case support (using Git
HEAD as of today), I found that quasisyntax seems quite broken:
We've spoken over IRC since then, but for those that do not frequent
there, it's simply
Hi Mark,
This is also not a patch review yet :)
On Thu 09 Jul 2009 18:11, Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org writes:
I added the following macros, whose names explicitly state how %nil
should be handled. See the comments in the patch for more information
about these.
On Tue 14 Jul 2009 10:07, Neil Jerram n...@ossau.uklinux.net writes:
but the right thing to do is to fix the scm_set_source_properties_x ()
code.
Yes, this would be better.
Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/
On Sun 12 Jul 2009 17:21, Mike Gran spk...@yahoo.com writes:
I'm finding that master fails to build with the following terminating
error:
---
GUILE_AUTO_COMPILE=0 ../meta/uninstalled-env guile-tools compile -o
ice-9/lineio.go ice-9/lineio.scm
ERROR: In procedure make_objcode_by_mmap:
Hello!
On Tue 14 Jul 2009 21:48, Daniel Kraft d...@domob.eu writes:
(defun primep (p optional from)
(let ((i (if from from 2)))
(while (and (/= (% p i) 0) (= (* i i) p))
(setq i (1+ i)))
(/= (% p i) 0)))
(primep 1283939) - #t
This is fantastic.
While of course the #f
On Wed 15 Jul 2009 00:05, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Then it could also try to interpret version numbers and determine
whether that bytecode is really incompatible, or whether it can
interpret it.
Are there scenarios where that would be worthwhile?
Maybe, e.g., when the `.go'
On Wed 15 Jul 2009 10:36, Daniel Kraft d...@domob.eu writes:
Ludovic Courtès wrote:
as well as found a (hopefully good) solution to automatically create
fluids not yet present on reference.
Is each Elisp variable mapped to a fluid? Eventually, you may need VM
instructions for
On Mon 20 Jul 2009 21:09, Kjetil S. Matheussen k.s.matheus...@notam02.no
writes:
On Mon, 20 Jul 2009, Bill Schottstaedt wrote:
For some reason, this code strikes me as funny:
(let ((j (lambda () 0))
(k 0))
(do ((i (j) (j))
(j (lambda () 1) (lambda () (+ i 1
((=
On Tue 21 Jul 2009 21:48, Daniel Kraft d...@domob.eu writes:
(defvar x 1)
(defun foo () x)
(lexical-let ((x 2))
x ; - 2
(foo) ; - 1
(setq x 3)
x ; - 3
(foo) ; - 1
(let ((x 4))
x ; - 4?
(foo) ; - 4
(setq x 5)
x ; - 5
(foo) ; - 5
) ; end the let
On Thu 23 Jul 2009 23:53, Ken Raeburn raeb...@raeburn.org writes:
On Jul 23, 2009, at 16:46, Andy Wingo wrote:
On Tue 21 Jul 2009 15:10, Daniel Kraft d...@domob.eu writes:
Just a little addition to the subject of extensions: I'd very much
like
to add lexical-let and lexical-let* as another
On Thu 23 Jul 2009 23:21, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
¡Hola!
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
OK, here's another idea. Why don't we keep this as a separate pass --
enabled if you pass a compilation option. That way it can be more
functional, and you can keep approximate source
Hi,
On Fri 24 Jul 2009 00:35, Andreas Rottmann a.rottm...@gmx.at writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
On Fri 03 Jul 2009 02:04, Andreas Rottmann a.rottm...@gmx.at writes:
Playing around with Guile's now-in-core syntax-case support (using Git
HEAD as of today), I found
Hi,
On Sat 25 Jul 2009 23:30, Andreas Rottmann a.rottm...@gmx.at writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
On Fri 24 Jul 2009 00:35, Andreas Rottmann a.rottm...@gmx.at writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
On Fri 03 Jul 2009 02:04, Andreas Rottmann a.rottm...@gmx.at writes
On Sun 26 Jul 2009 15:12, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Hi,
szgyg sz...@ludens.elte.hu writes:
5. Parameters in libguile_i18n...@libguile_i18n_major@_la_LDFLAGS is
wrong (libguile/Makefile.am line 135). Please copy from other .so's
LD_FLAGS, as the others build fine.
I've seen
elements of the numeric tower; in this case we have a short tower:
uniform vectors are bytevectors.
commit 86d88a223c64276e7cd9b4503e7e2ecca5aae320
Author: Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com
Date: Thu Jul 16 21:51:47 2009 +0200
remove deprecated functions from unif.c
* libguile/unif.h
Hi,
On Tue 28 Jul 2009 21:54, Linas Vepstas linasveps...@gmail.com writes:
I've been running guile-1.9.0 for a while
You are out of date, then ;-) Planning to skip directly to 1.9.2, maybe? :)
, and recently saw the error message
warning: stack count incorrect!
print out on stdout. I
Hello Daniel,
On Fri 31 Jul 2009 08:02, Daniel Kraft d...@domob.eu writes:
Hi Neil,
Neil Jerram wrote:
Daniel Kraft d...@domob.eu writes:
Lambda arguments are still always dynamically bound, which is quite a
pity as it inhibits tail-call optimization;
This prompted me to wonder if using
Hi Daniel,
On Fri 31 Jul 2009 17:14, Daniel Kraft d...@domob.eu writes:
Hi Ken,
Ken Raeburn wrote:
On Jul 31, 2009, at 02:02, Daniel Kraft wrote:
Iterative prime sieve, (length (find-primes-to 5000)):
Scheme: 0.42s
Elisp, no void checks, lexical let: 3.40s
Elisp, no void checks,
Hi Neil,
On Thu 30 Jul 2009 23:10, Neil Jerram n...@ossau.uklinux.net writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
On Wed 22 Jul 2009 23:48, Neil Jerram n...@ossau.uklinux.net writes:
I have two overall questions in mind.
- What do you have in mind as regards releasing this? Even though
Hi Daniel,
On Wed 29 Jul 2009 14:50, Daniel Kraft d...@domob.eu writes:
For the timings, I used a simple prime sieve implemented imperatively
with while and set's, because the recursive one would put elisp without
tail-calls at a disadvantage (and because lexical binding does not yet
work
Hi Ken,
As a voice from the the sidelines, I just want to say thanks for all
your input!
On Thu 30 Jul 2009 05:23, Ken Raeburn raeb...@raeburn.org writes:
Would [open-coding primitives] interfere with possibly blending Scheme
GOOPS code with Elisp someday? Or is the generic support there at a
Hi Mike,
Another niggle:
On Sat 01 Aug 2009 19:58, Mike Gran spk...@yahoo.com writes:
On Fri, 2009-07-31 at 01:21 +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
Michael Gran spk...@yahoo.com writes:
+#define SCM_MAKE_CHAR(x) ({scm_t_int32 _x = (x);\
+ _x 0
On Tue 04 Aug 2009 18:17, Daniel Kraft d...@domob.eu writes:
Andy Wingo wrote:
Don't conjecture, profile ;-)
I'd like to do so, but it seems that Guile does not include a profiler,
does it? A search turned up some patch/code, but I didn't get the
impression it would work very well -- do
Hi Ken,
On Tue 04 Aug 2009 11:28, Ken Raeburn raeb...@raeburn.org writes:
I implemented Ackermann's function A(m,n), a recursive function with
scary performance characteristics, based on the definition given at
wikipedia involving lots of +1 and -1 operations...
Guile's VM does not yet have
Hi,
On Tue 04 Aug 2009 11:28, Ken Raeburn raeb...@raeburn.org writes:
I implemented Ackermann's function A(m,n), a recursive function with
scary performance characteristics, based on the definition given at
wikipedia involving lots of +1 and -1 operations...
I have now added 1+ and 1- ops to
Hi Ken,
Replying a lot :)
On Tue 04 Aug 2009 11:28, Ken Raeburn raeb...@raeburn.org writes:
% time guile -c '(begin (load-compiled ack.go) (ackermann 3 9))'
48.728u 22.016s 1:10.75 99.9% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
%
Not much better than loading the .scm file, and only better for small
values of
Hi,
On Wed 05 Aug 2009 12:42, Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
The simple stack formulation of Ackermann's function is faster of
course:
(define (A m n)
(if (= m 0)
(+ n 1)
(if (= n 0)
(A (- m 1) 1)
(A (- m 1) (A m (- n 1
On Thu 06 Aug 2009 17:59, Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
On Wed 05 Aug 2009 12:42, Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
The simple stack formulation of Ackermann's function is faster of
course:
(define (A m n)
(if (= m 0)
(+ n 1)
(if (= n 0
Hello Guilers,
Today's the 10th, we release on the 15th, ergo we're frozen.
What does this mean? Well I think the dilly is that we shouldn't be
pushing to master, except to fix things that don't work at all, and to
update documentation, NEWS, etc.
What if you don't have push access? Well give
Hi Mike,
On Mon 10 Aug 2009 23:08, Mike Gran spk...@yahoo.com writes:
Today's the 10th, we release on the 15th, ergo we're frozen.
Hmmm. I should have been watching the clock. I've left master in
an odd state w.r.t. strings and chars. The storage is available for
non-8-bit strings and
Hi Ken,
On Thu 06 Aug 2009 18:30, Ken Raeburn raeb...@raeburn.org writes:
On Aug 5, 2009, at 10:06, I wrote:
(3) My four-year-old comments on scm_enter/leave_guile, recorded in
threads.c around line 300, still stand Those functions really
ought to go away. At least they're confined to
Hi,
On Sun 09 Aug 2009 22:24, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
A recent thread on `guile-user' [0] raises an important concern: what
should we do with `guile-1.8.pc' when 2.x is out?
IMO, guile-1.8.pc is only provided by the guile-1.8 package. 1.8 and 2.0
are parallel-installable.
Hello Ludovic :)
On Sun 09 Aug 2009 18:41, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
The second model is when you already have a wide deployed base. You can
make additions to your API and ABI, and deprecated old API or ABI, but
you can't remove old API
Heya,
On Sat 08 Aug 2009 23:52, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
Perhaps the deal is that 1+ is not being inlined. It seems to be calling
out to the 1+ procedure, which is a primitive, actually making it a
bit slower. I'll see what I can do
On Thu 06 Aug 2009 20:34, Daniel Kraft d...@domob.eu writes:
the last days, I worked on a rewrite of the Guile Tutorial (with the
Tortoise package); just for fun, but also to update some stuff to my
liking and last but not least change the API usage from the deprecated
GH routines to the
Hello,
Running srfi-14.test
FAIL: srfi-14.test: Latin-1 (8-bit charset): char-set:letter (membership)
FAIL: srfi-14.test: Latin-1 (8-bit charset): char-set:letter (size)
FAIL: srfi-14.test: Latin-1 (8-bit charset): char-set:lower-case (size)
FAIL: srfi-14.test: Latin-1 (8-bit charset):
On Tue 25 Aug 2009 17:06, Mike Gran spk...@yahoo.com writes:
The commit breaks functions that have to do with locale-specific case
conversion and character-sets, and some tests will fail for the time
being.
Ah, should have read guile-devel first :)
Happy hacking!
A
--
http://wingolog.org/
Hi Ken,
On Thu 27 Aug 2009 00:51, Ken Raeburn raeb...@raeburn.org writes:
After the build-order problem I just reported causes a module to fail to
load, the build process hangs here:
I sometimes get these when I'm hacking the boot process. It's probably a
bug, but it never happens -- unless,
On Thu 27 Aug 2009 00:48, Ken Raeburn raeb...@raeburn.org writes:
Building on GNU/Linux, with a fresh build tree, and without an installed
tree under $prefix, fails for me. I get:
./guile_filter_doc_snarfage --filter-snarfage) regex-posix.doc || { rm
regex-posix.doc; false; }
cat
On Thu 27 Aug 2009 17:20, Mike Gran spk...@yahoo.com writes:
I pushed the commit for Unicode-capable srfi-14. Of all parts necessary
for Unicode, this patch has the largest amount of new code and is most
likely to cause compilation problems.
On Linux, this now works fine for me; make
The failing test:
FAIL: r6rs-ports.test: 7.2.7 Input Ports: make-custom-binary-input-port
--
http://wingolog.org/
Hey Daniel,
Awesome work on the reader! And awesome work in general. I met Neil and
Ludovic last weekend, and we're all super-plussed about your work.
I want to get Mark's nil patch merged in, then start merging your work
to master. We need to get it there before Ken can update, I think.
More
Hey all,
I'm working on pulling dispatch of non-VM procedure applications into
the VM -- so invoking primitives written in C can happen quickly from
within the VM.
This is also a step along the path towards native compilation. Procedure
dispatch right now has so many cases -- it is feasible to
Hi Barry,
Thank you for the bug report, it was quite interesting.
On Sat 29 Aug 2009 17:49, Barry Fishman barry_fish...@acm.org writes:
#! /bin/sh
# -*- scheme -*-
exec guile -s $0 $*
!#
(load dotimes.scm)
(dotimes (indx 5)
(display indx)
(newline))
When compiling tryme, what
of these, but we can try. We need to pay special attention
to avoiding unnecessary C API incompatibilities, but hopefully we have
sufficient room for refactoring.
On Sat 29 Aug 2009 13:38, Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
scm_tc7_programVM procedures
- native support
Yep.
scm_tcs_closures
Hi,
On Tue 01 Sep 2009 10:19, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Mike Gran spk...@yahoo.com writes:
The latest commit 'Add full Unicode capability to ports and the default
reader' 889975e51accb80491af76fc5db980aeb3edd342 adds the majority of
the functionality for non-ASCII strings.
Hi Ludovic,
On Mon 31 Aug 2009 10:42, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
scm_tc7_subr_2oSCM (*) () -- 0 arguments.
scm_tc7_subr_1 SCM (*) (SCM) -- 1 argument.
scm_tc7_subr_1oSCM (*) (SCM) -- 1 optional argument
On Mon 31 Aug 2009 10:46, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Hi,
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
Now, does this indicate a bug in Guile, or at least an undesirable
behavior?
Yes, I think so.
Programs that want to rely on bare R5RS (e.g., SILex) have nothing else
but `load
Hi Mark,
On Wed 02 Sep 2009 18:17, Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org writes:
The ability to set! arbitrary module top-level variables from outside
the module, using the syntax (set! (@@ MOD NAME) EXP), destroys our
ability to several important optimizations.
As long as such ability exists, we
Hey Guilers,
It's the 5th of the month, meaning you should pay your landlord/bank,
and also stop committing new features to Guile's git repository.
Bugfixes, doc updates, etc are still most welcome, of course.
This particular cycle brings a new wrinkle, that Ludovic will hopefully
be merging the
Hi Andreas,
On Tue 18 Aug 2009 14:19, Andreas Rottmann a.rottm...@gmx.at writes:
Will going from a precise GC to BDW-GC not have drawbacks? IIRC, the PLT
people went in the opposite direction. A quick google turned up this:
http://www.cs.brown.edu/pipermail/plt-scheme/2006-June/013840.html
Hey Mike,
Would you mind posting to the list a state of unicode guile summary?
I'm very excited about finally being able to say Guile does unicode,
and was wondering what was left to do :)
Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/
On Sun 06 Sep 2009 02:37, Ken Raeburn raeb...@raeburn.org writes:
BTW, the bdw-gc branch with my patch and SCM_DEBUG==1 still fails tests
on my Mac.
In guardians.c, line 169, SCM_CAR is applied to a non-pair:
Running popen.test
Running ports.test
scm_error_pair_access
Non-pair accessed
Hi Mike,
On Sun 13 Sep 2009 16:30, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Mike Gran spk...@yahoo.com writes:
With the default behavior of 1.9.x, REPL debug and backtrace are broken.
Indeed, it looks like the VM frames are ignored.
Hopefully by the next release, and certainly by the
On Wed 16 Sep 2009 02:20, Mike Gran spk...@yahoo.com writes:
[Insert standard rant about using -Werror here.]
We should not be making releases with -Werror.
Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/
On Tue 08 Sep 2009 15:17, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
We should implement constant folding in the tree-il-glil pass. A naive
implementation looks like this:
diff --git a/module/language/tree-il/compile-glil.scm
b/module/language/tree-il/compile-glil.scm
index 86b610f..57a46c8
On Tue 01 Sep 2009 08:26, Ken Raeburn raeb...@raeburn.org writes:
On Sep 1, 2009, at 02:23, Ken Raeburn wrote:
I can clean some of this up trivially -- SCM_PACK/SCM_UNPACK as
needed, change == to scm_is_eq. The initializers make it slightly
less trivial, and I can imagine different courses
On Sun 13 Sep 2009 23:17, Neil Jerram n...@ossau.uklinux.net writes:
I think that's the right eventual question, anyway. The context is
running Alan Grover's mod_lisp-for-guile in 1.9.2.
The mod_lisp-for-guile code includes a use of read-hash-extend to
define a syntax for a compiled regular
Hi,
On Wed 16 Sep 2009 11:09, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
100 SCM
101 scm_array_handle_element_type (scm_t_array_handle *h)
102 {
103
if (h-element_type 0 || h-element_type SCM_ARRAY_ELEMENT_TYPE_LAST)
104 abort (); /* guile programming error */
105 return
Hello,
Unused variables are compiled away to only their side effects. Yet
sometimes they are good for documentation. As in this case:
- module/language/assembly.scm -
index 683da6c..95f8a2d 100644
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@
(+ 1 *len-len*
Hi Ludovic,
On Mon 21 Sep 2009 11:08, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Hi,
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
- module/language/assembly.scm
-
index 683da6c..95f8a2d 100644
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@
(+ 1 *len-len* (string-length str
---BeginMessage---
[Apologies if you get duplicates of this message.]
This message is being posted to various lists to inform members of the
Scheme community of the development of an amended charter for the
Scheme Language Steering Committee, which is overseeing the process of
Scheme
On Fri 02 Oct 2009 02:15, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Because of the macrology that’s used to statically allocate stringbufs [0],
the string has to be a literal:
SCM_SYMBOL (s_foo, foo);
What do you think?
Need more information :) How widespread is the non-literal usage? Could
Hey Guilers,
I haven't posted for a while about what I've been up to, so an update is
probably apropos.
Some of you might have noticed a particular entry from Neil's summary of
the lovely meeting we had in the Pyrenees -- the one about implementing
`eval' in Scheme. I'd like to expound on that a
On Mon 05 Oct 2009 23:52, Andreas Rottmann a.rottm...@gmx.at writes:
I just noticed that the patch breaks reader.test, as that hardcodes
the message exception message format string (eeew!) -- if you apply that
patch, you might want to change that string as well.
Oh man, at some point we have
Greetings Guilers,
It seems that the moon has rolled around again! Meaning, of course, that
Guile is frozen. Same thing as usual: testing, regression fixes,
documentation, etc.
I haven't discussed this with Ludovic yet, but maybe we can relax this
freeze slightly. This cycle has been a bit less
Hello,
I am climbing out of a case-lambda hole, and am wondering about
integration. If you missed the first part of this, check:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel/9436
The deal is that we need case-lambda, and then some kind of
typecase-lambda to get efficient dispatch of the
On Wed 14 Oct 2009 09:33, Stanislav Ievlev stanislav.iev...@gmail.com writes:
2009/10/14 Stanislav Ievlev stanislav.iev...@gmail.com:
As I understand you should mark scm_fdes_to_port as a deprecated and
don't use it in own code (e.g. in socket.c).
Ooops, I'm wrong.
scm_fdes_to_port works is
On Wed 14 Oct 2009 10:11, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
I ask because I'm working on a macro that transforms R6RS library
expressions, which contain nested `define' calls, into Guile modules.
My code rewrites these defines as location declarations that get
exported as part of a
Hi Mike,
On Tue 06 Oct 2009 23:35, Mike Gran spk...@yahoo.com writes:
From: Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com
Subject: frozen!
I need to roll back the changes made to i18n.c
that made locale-specific case conversion of strings
work on GNU but break on Darwin. Locale-specific
case conversion
201 - 300 of 1974 matches
Mail list logo
