Re: compile error: "LC_CTYPE_MASK" redefined
Hi, William Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hmm, i did a fresh co again. Then ./autogen.sh, configure. Now it > doesn't complain anymore. The thing is new configure checks were added that `AC_DEFINE' various new CPP variables. For some reason, when `configure' is automatically re-created from the Makefile rules, the header template (i.e., `config.in') is not re-created, so we end up with missing `#define's. It actually looks like an Autoconf/Automake bug. > Do i still have to rerun ./autogen.sh, configure again after some `cvs > update' ? I thought i only need to rerun make and make install.. Usually, `make' should be enough. Sometimes, `autoheader' right before `make' can be helpful. :-) > debian + powerpc The new i18n code should compile and work fine on GNU/Linux (which is what most of us use). There *could* be problems on other systems, although we haven't had any such reports in a while. Thanks, Ludovic. ___ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user
Re: compile error: "LC_CTYPE_MASK" redefined
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > Make sure you also run `autoheader && autoreconf -i'. Hmm, i did a fresh co again. Then ./autogen.sh, configure. Now it doesn't complain anymore. Do i still have to rerun ./autogen.sh, configure again after some `cvs update' ? I thought i only need to rerun make and make install.. ps. It seems sometimes `cvs update' differs from a fresh co.. > Besides, what platform are you compiling on? debian + powerpc -- William 题目:《秋思》 作者:陆游（１１２５－１２１０） 利欲驱人万火牛，江湖浪迹一沙鸥。 日长似岁闲方觉，事大如山醉亦休。 衣杵相望深巷月，井桐摇落故园秋。 欲舒老眼无高处，安得元龙百尺楼。 ___ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user
Tail Call Optimization in guile
Hi, I'm a little confused. The Wikipedia entry on guile has a vague statement about how guile can't do tail call optimization in functions that use C code. If this is true, this seems like a major, crippling constraint, since most non-trivial use of guile as an extension language will involve calling native code, and many simple functions aren't feasible without tail call optimization. But the guile documentation doesn't seem to mention this drawback anywhere, and I know that other scheme to C interfaces, like gambit-c, have no problem with this. The conclusion I've drawn is that the Wikipedia article is far too vague, and that in fact guile can optimize tail calls in all cases except when C code and scheme code are mutually recursive; that is, scheme code calls C code which calls the scheme code again. This makes much more sense to me. Is this correct? Are there other situations where guile has trouble with tail calls? Wikipedia also says that guile has difficulties with call/cc, and I assume this is a similar issue, calling a continuation that was captured in scheme code that was called from a different C function than the currently running scheme code. Right? (confusing sentence, I know!) The guile documentation has a chapter called "Functional and performance constraints," which is currently completely empty. I assume it is meant to cover issues such as these. If somebody can point me towards some answers, I'll go and set the record straight on Wikipedia. Thanks, Josh ___ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user
