Mark H Weaver writes:
> As a result, some important properties of SRFI-111 boxes do not hold for
> your proposed implementation. For example, in SRFI-111, (box? x)
> implies that (box-ref x) will not raise an exception, and this fact can
> be exploited by a compiler to produce better native code
Hi Glenn,
"Glenn Michaels" writes:
> Currently, guile's (srfi srfi-111) module ("mutable boxes") provides
> an implementation based on records with a single value field.
>
> Wouldn't it make more sense to re-export the functions make-variable,
> variable?, variable-ref and variable-set! from the
Hello,
The following example from the Guile manual in subsection 7.5.9, fails
for me both on Guile master 2.1.3.94-1a1c3 and Guile 2.0.11 from Debian
Testing.
--8<---cut here---start->8---
(use-modules (srfi srfi-10))
(define-reader-ctor 'hash
On Tue 02 Aug 2016 12:25, "Glenn Michaels" writes:
> Trivial patch implementing this suggestion attached.
>
> --- a/module/srfi/srfi-111.scm
> +++ b/module/srfi/srfi-111.scm
> @@ -17,21 +17,9 @@
> ;; Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301
> USA
>
> (define-m
On Thu 28 Jul 2016 19:21, "helpful.user@discard.email"
writes:
> The following patch to readline should fix the tab issue:
>
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bash/2014-10/msg00211.html
>
> (AFACT you need to put "set enable-bracketed-paste on" in your ~
> /.inputrc too)
Fascinating! I
On Tue 26 Jul 2016 22:15, "Glenn Michaels" writes:
> The section on the (rnrs lists) library in the guile manual contains the
> following:
>
> Scheme Procedure: fold-left combine nil list1 list2 …
> Scheme Procedure: fold-right combine nil list1 list2 …
>
> These procedures are identical to
On Tue 26 Jul 2016 17:55, Christopher Allan Webber
writes:
> I've been told on IRC that the "right solution" is to add r6rs style
> binary ports:
>
> http://www.r6rs.org/final/html/r6rs-lib/r6rs-lib-Z-H-9.html
>
> So maybe that's what should be done?
I did this :) Missing some tests though a
On Sun 24 Jul 2016 13:15, Nala Ginrut writes:
> In 2.1.3.59-516f7, the 'continue' in 'while loop' throw exception. It's
> OK in stable-2.0.
>
> code
> (define i 0)
> (while (< i 20)
> (display i)(newline)
> (when (= i 11) (continue
