On Jan 23, 2008 12:31 PM, Charles Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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. >
I just received word that the Guile folks have approved my patch and will include it in Guile 1.6.9 when it is released. > -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
