Just came here to say: Congratulations Linus! That was definitely the most
important part of your message :-).
Aleix
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 3:48 AM Linus Björnstam <
linus.bjorns...@veryfast.biz> wrote:
> I am working on a patch to guile to add definitions to just about every
> body except for
i finalize my ideas about 'controls' and loops (with break and continue, as
while feature them ,even if scheme and macro do not allow ? (if someone
else have idea and solution about it?) implements of 'continue and 'break
because hygiene forbid it)
On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 5:29 PM Maxime Devos wrote:
>
> On 31-08-2022 09:01, Damien Mattei wrote:
> > I always try to keep compatibility with RnRS and in fact except cond
> > none of when, unless, cond, case, while, and do are in standart RnRS
> schem
>
> 'when', 'unless' and 'do' are actually
On 31-08-2022 09:01, Damien Mattei wrote:
I always try to keep compatibility with RnRS and in fact except cond
none of when, unless, cond, case, while, and do are in standart RnRS schem
'when', 'unless' and 'do' are actually RnRS, see (rnrs control).
'case' is also RnRS, see (rnrs base).
Hello Linus,
if you have a repo somewhere with code this could be interesting ? do you
think this could be set in the main code of guile? or is it just a personal
project? there is two options, one is to have guile modified for doing this
, the other is: i can modify when, unless, cond, case,
I am working on a patch to guile to add definitions to just about every body
except for (begin ...) outside definition context.
The patch is trivial, but I have to document it and a patch to r6rs that makes
the r6rs cons work according to spec.
I had a kid recently so it might take some time
-- Forwarded message -
From: Damien Mattei
Date: Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 12:09 PM
Subject: Re: expression and definition context in Scheme
To: Maxime Devos
yes , the same with 'while too, i will make it in my Scheme+ to allow inner
'define in those blocks without other stuff
On 27-08-2022 21:02, Damien Mattei wrote:
in fact just allow 'define that act locally ,see my comment below
I do not know what semantics you want.
Also, even if (begin ...) and (let () ...) where unified, it would
be a shame to lose the ability to only have some definitions
On 27-08-2022 21:02, Damien Mattei wrote:
I haven't read the RnRS closely, but I doubt that
(some-procedure (define foo 0) (define bar 0))
? i do not understand well the meaning
Me neither, that's what I meant.
You are proposing to unify expression context and definition
hello Maxime,
On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 7:00 PM Maxime Devos wrote:
>
> On 27-08-2022 18:48, Damien Mattei wrote:
>
> My ideas is as it is so easy to cheat the compiler
>
> I don't think it's cheating or abusive.
>
> from seeing the expressio context why does the compiler restrict this?
>
On 27-08-2022 18:48, Damien Mattei wrote:
My ideas is as it is so easy to cheat the compiler
I don't think it's cheating or abusive.
from seeing the expressio context why does the compiler restrict this?
expression and defintion context, i'm not sure they are in scheme
standarts, are they
Hello,
i'm facing sometimes recursively the problem to have definitions in
expression context, which i manage every time by adding an upper empty (let
() my definitions goes here )
the last case i was facing this probleme is defining a 'for macro:
;; scheme@(guile-user)> (for ({i <+ 0} {i < 5}
12 matches
Mail list logo
