On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 11:58:38PM +0200, Henrik Sarvell wrote:
> Regarding detach, would this be a proper way of doing a server where detach
> is optional?:
>
> (de server (P H Detach)
>...
>(loop
> (setq *Sock (listen P))
> (NIL (fork) (close P))
> (close *Sock) )
>
Hi Henrik,
> Thanks Alex, will try and find the time to refactor all the local calls in
> the ext library sources.
Yes, sorry for the confusion! The change in namespace semantics last year was a
serious cut, but namespaces in PicoLisp were relatively new at that time, and
the change resulted in
I bit the bullet and refactored, all is good now with the newest version.
Regarding detach, would this be a proper way of doing a server where detach
is optional?:
(de server (P H Detach)
(setq *Port P P (port *Port) *Home (cons H (chop H)))
(gc)
(loop
(setq *Sock (listen P))
Henrik Sarvell writes:
> I should probably create a small writeup on how to do that
> for a typical PL project listening on a non standard port.
https://logand.com/blog/picolisp-behind-nginx-proxy.html
from 22sep2009, time flies!
--
UNSUBSCRIBE:
Thanks Alex, will try and find the time to refactor all the local calls in
the ext library sources.
Regarding ssl and httpGate, I'm managing proxy forwarding with Nginx these
days (encrypted too) so I could actually just delete them as I don't use
them anymore. I should probably create a small
Hi Henrik,
> When I try to run my stuff I get [ext/base.l:9] pico -- Bad symbol namespace
>
> And that file currently looks like this:
> https://bitbucket.org/hsarvell/ext/src/31474ae47656ae0c020f7009c9ed14c5cc86cc44/base.l?at=default=file-view-default
It is the 'local' call:
(local num?)