Re: Let's extend 'eval' and 'run' (was: Variable number of

Hi Alex, Then (xml T ...) would generate a list, while (xml ...) would write to the current stream, no matter if it is chunked or not. you are right, the interface would be more logical without 'out'. I think the parameter Out = T should have been associated with the N parameter, i.e. -2 ~

Re: Let's extend 'eval' and 'run' (was: Variable number of

Hi Alex, Then (xml T ...) would generate a list, while (xml ...) would write to the current stream, no matter if it is chunked or not. you are right, the interface would be more logical without 'out'. I think the parameter Out = T should have been associated with the N parameter, i.e. -2 ~

Re: Let's extend 'eval' and 'run' (was: Variable number of

Hi Alex, I have attached the lib/xml.l with a minor change which avoids calling 'out' when the output file is NIL. I found that (ht:Out *Chunked (xml *Sock ... was breaking chunking output so if I use (ht:Out *Chunked (xml ... with the attached file,

Re: Let's extend 'eval' and 'run' (was: Variable number of

Hi Tomas, thanks for the changes! I have attached the lib/xml.l with a minor change which avoids calling 'out' when the output file is NIL. I found that I think that there is a general problem with the way 'xml' handles its first argument: (de xml Lst (let Out (and Lst (atom (car

Re: Let's extend 'eval' and 'run' (was: Variable number of

Hi Tomas, Alex, the merged lib/xml.l file is attached. I guess it will be -r again when you save it? Thanks! Yes, I had to 'chmod' it. It'll have to go in the next version:-o Yes, but this is all right. It is now available in the testing version. Cheers, - Alex -- UNSUBSCRIBE:

Re: Let's extend 'eval' and 'run' (was: Variable number of

Hi all, happy New Year! Sure. Both the new 'xml' as well as the improved 'xml' should be included. I would suggest to put 'xml' and the changes into lib/xml.l. Alex, the merged lib/xml.l file is attached. I guess it will be -r again when you save it? Can you merge them together,

Re: Let's extend 'eval' and 'run' (was: Variable number of

Hi Alex, BTW, did you have a chance to experiment with the new extensions of 'eval' and 'run'? I feel that the new 'lst' argument (for excluding specific symbols from the process) was a good idea. I think it was a good idea too. I have attached the xml function which makes use of the new

Re: Let's extend 'eval' and 'run' (was: Variable number of

Hi Tomas, Would it be a good idea for these to become part of picolisp as we discussed earlier? Sure. Both the new 'xml' as well as the improved 'xml' should be included. I tried xml2-test.l, and it passed all tests. I would suggest to put 'xml' and the changes into lib/xml.l. What do you

Re: Let's extend 'eval' and 'run' (was: Variable number of arguments

Hi Alex, So I would propose to extend 'eval' and 'run' with another optional argument (eval 'any ['cnt ['lst]]) (run 'any ['cnt ['lst]]) I prefer this solution:-) Cheers, Tomas -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]