On Jan 23, 2008 6:25 AM, Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Quoting Mike or Penny Novack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > >> > >> Additionally, when building the setup.exe on Windows we compile guile > from > >> source anyway, so applying a patch that has been sent to bug-guile but > is > >> not contained in any release yet is perfectly fine, at least IMHO. > >> > >> -- andi5 > >> > >> > >> > > Again I am probably making some wrong assumptions. Compiling WHAT? The > > interpreter certainly, "eval" itself, perhaps a few of the most > > basic/most frequently used function definitions. But with most > > "extendable" languages like LISP and its dialects the bulk of the > > definitions available at the start are usually done in the language > > itself. OR, in "compile and go" implementations that makes little > > difference (any that are added are compiled before execution/evaluation > > as opposed to a strict "interpreter" implementation where the expression > > would be reinterpreted every time used.) > > > > Isn't that true of Guile? Some reason to believe that these particular > > erroneous definitions were part of the compile? Even if they were, what > > difference would that make except perhaps speed when being evaluated? > > They still could be overridden by redefinition, yes? > > > > (I hope not confusing people with bringing up matters of how LISP like > > languages are implemented..) > > I think what he meant is that we start with the guild source tree > and create our own guile environment from source. In other words, we > control the guile environment on windows so we can apply this patch. > Whereas on other platforms we assume the OS/Distro provides guile > to us and we just use it. >
The bug is in the Guile source code, in libguile/filesys.c. In truth, I made the (perhaps incorrect) assumption that the GnuCash project would not want to maintain custom fixes to Guile. If that's an option, a more detailed description of the bug, along with my very simple patch can be found here<http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-guile/2008-01/msg00041.html> . But as I said, this bug is not really a big deal at the moment because GnuCash isn't actually using the dirname or basename procedures. (I grep'd all the .scm files and found no matches.) So I just wanted to warn anyone who might decide to begin using these procedures. -Charles > > -derek > -- > Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory > Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB) > URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/ PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH > [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key available > > _______________________________________________ > gnucash-devel mailing list > gnucash-devel@gnucash.org > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel > _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
