Am 17.11.2013 23:38, schrieb David A. Wheeler:
On Sun, 17 Nov 2013 21:31:34 +0100, Jörg F. Wittenberger:
In an attempt to better understand and document the source code I added
type annotations (using the chicken's syntax and using chicken to verify it).
I like this idea. In a few places this
Am 17.11.2013 22:17, schrieb David A. Wheeler:
On Sun, 17 Nov 2013 15:13:09 -0500, John Cowan co...@mercury.ccil.org wrote:
I don't see any obvious way to do so, except with a weak-keyed hash
table mapping ports to values. Unfortunately, weak-keyed hash tables
are non-portable in the nature
Am 18.11.2013 10:38, schrieb Jörg F. Wittenberger:
Am 17.11.2013 23:38, schrieb David A. Wheeler:
On Sun, 17 Nov 2013 21:31:34 +0100, Jörg F. Wittenberger:
In an attempt to better understand and document the source code I added
type annotations (using the chicken's syntax and using chicken to
Am 18.11.2013 10:56, schrieb Jörg F. Wittenberger:
Am 17.11.2013 22:17, schrieb David A. Wheeler:
On Sun, 17 Nov 2013 15:13:09 -0500, John Cowan
co...@mercury.ccil.org wrote:
There is a gimmick we could use. We could create a reset port
function
that *REMOVES* the entry from the
In a first attempt to feed the source to some other Scheme I went ahead
and sent it to the rscheme compiler.
Doesn't work. It has the same problem as Guile: it will refuse to read
certain #sharp syntax.
**HALT**
error: scan-token:439: #\# cannot be followed by #\:
Is there a way in Guile to
On Mon, 18 Nov 2013 10:48:33 +0100, Jörg F. Wittenberger
joerg.wittenber...@softeyes.net wrote:
I'll deal with that. David, should I just keep patching or do you have
a current snapshot of the accepted patches so far for me?
It's always easiest to send me patches based on the git repo.
Snag
On Mon, 18 Nov 2013 12:19:21 +0100, Jörg F. Wittenberger
joerg.wittenber...@softeyes.net wrote:
I wonder: the code already creates fake port object wrappers. Wouldn't
this be the natural place to stick such per-port settings into??!!
That's not a bad idea. I was hoping for the fake ports to
On Mon, 18 Nov 2013 10:56:41 +0100, Jörg F. Wittenberger
joerg.wittenber...@softeyes.net wrote:
So far I did not understand why does this have to be port-specific in
the first place. Maybe that would be the killer argument.
It's by analogy to other read settings, such as fold-case, so it's
Am 18.11.2013 15:25, schrieb David A. Wheeler:
On Mon, 18 Nov 2013 13:23:32 +0100, Jörg F. Wittenberger
joerg.wittenber...@softeyes.net wrote:
In a first attempt to feed the source to some other Scheme I went ahead
and sent it to the rscheme compiler.
Doesn't work. It has the same
Am 18.11.2013 15:28, schrieb David A. Wheeler:
On Mon, 18 Nov 2013 12:19:21 +0100, Jörg F. Wittenberger
joerg.wittenber...@softeyes.net wrote:
I wonder: the code already creates fake port object wrappers. Wouldn't
this be the natural place to stick such per-port settings into??!!
That's
On Mon, 18 Nov 2013 12:09:43 +0100, Jörg F. Wittenberger
joerg.wittenber...@softeyes.net wrote:
Attached a slightly better version of the add types patch. This one
replaces (values) with a (no-values) syntax from the compatibility layer
and has those procedures, which used to return no
Am 18.11.2013 15:25, schrieb David A. Wheeler:
On Mon, 18 Nov 2013 13:23:32 +0100, Jörg F. Wittenberger
joerg.wittenber...@softeyes.net wrote:
In a first attempt to feed the source to some other Scheme I went ahead
and sent it to the rscheme compiler.
Doesn't work. It has the
Jörg F. Wittenberger scripsit:
IMHO there should be no undefined *value* as such. It should be
just undefined what's being returned. If - for some reason - some
fake value need to be there to satisfy some other condition, so be
it. But Scheme would IMHO be better off along the default
13 matches
Mail list logo
