Janneke Nieuwenhuizen writes:
> Jonas Hahnfeld writes:
>
>>> and never got merged. So we've just been patching Guile ourselves (to
>>> create Windows binaries for Dezyne, for example). Recently, Jonas
>>> Hahnfeld managed to split that patch up in several bits, make fixes for
>>> lightening, and get it merged; lovely!
>>
>> I would like to clarify that I *did not* split up the patch because it
>> was entirely based on the concept of requiring and patching mini-gmp.
>> The merged changes work with upstream interfaces of GMP, at the expense
>> of a slightly slower conversion in case the value at run-time falls
>> between 2**32 and 2**64 and does not fit into long.
>
> Ah sorry, I totally missed that. But your patch still adheres to the
> requirement of having identical .go files for any 64-bit system, right?
Hmm, I'm really puzzled now. In
https://codeberg.org/guile/guile/pulls/90#issuecomment-9744014
I believe it's you (? I'm not all that great with these newfangled GUI
interfaces) who replies to my
>> I'll be looking at that next for =wip-mingw-2026=, which interestingly,
>> "lacks" the huge x86_64-mingw32 commit that we've been working with for
>> years.
with
> AFAICT the commit has been split up, [..]
What am I missing? I looked into your patch at the time, the one that
got merged, and remember being pleasantly surprised at how small it was
compared to my quite invasive patch that tried to cater for sizeof (int)
== sizeof (long) on MinGW, and wondering how you actually did the
splitting. Hmm.
Greetings,
Janneke
--
Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <[email protected]> | GNU LilyPond https://LilyPond.org
Freelance IT https://www.JoyOfSource.com | Avatar® https://AvatarAcademy.com
