bug#73605: [PATCH] Replace SRFI-64 with a new implementation.

2024-10-26 Thread lloda
> On 26 Oct 2024, at 16:09, Tomas Volf <~@wolfsden.cz> wrote: >>> * test-approximate requires real arguments. The old version accepted >>> complex arguments. > > No objections, since it seems that (imag-part 0) works just fine, I can > basically rewrite it to always consider the input complex

bug#73605: [PATCH] Replace SRFI-64 with a new implementation.

2024-10-26 Thread Tomas Volf
Hello, I was thinking about this and then forgot to reply. Sorry about that. Ludovic Courtès writes: > Hi, > > lloda skribis: > >> I'm pleased to see all these fixes. However, I noticed a few breakages. They >> come from relying on undocumented behavior, but only using the public >> interface

bug#73605: [PATCH] Replace SRFI-64 with a new implementation.

2024-10-26 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi, lloda skribis: > I'm pleased to see all these fixes. However, I noticed a few breakages. They > come from relying on undocumented behavior, but only using the public > interface, so others might be affected. I don't propose to patch them, but > perhaps to make a note in NEWS or (for the l

bug#73605: [PATCH] Replace SRFI-64 with a new implementation.

2024-10-21 Thread Tomas Volf
Ludovic Courtès writes: > Tomas, I leave you the satisfaction of closing all the SRFI-64 bugs. > :-) Thank you for merging the patch, I am off to close the bug reports :) Tomas -- There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache invalidation, naming things and off-by-one errors. si

bug#73605: [PATCH] Replace SRFI-64 with a new implementation.

2024-10-21 Thread lloda
I'm pleased to see all these fixes. However, I noticed a few breakages. They come from relying on undocumented behavior, but only using the public interface, so others might be affected. I don't propose to patch them, but perhaps to make a note in NEWS or (for the last two) to add a paragraph in

bug#73605: [PATCH] Replace SRFI-64 with a new implementation.

2024-10-20 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Tomas, I leave you the satisfaction of closing all the SRFI-64 bugs. :-) Ludo’.

bug#73605: [PATCH] Replace SRFI-64 with a new implementation.

2024-10-20 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi, Ludovic Courtès skribis: > Tomas Volf <~@wolfsden.cz> skribis: > >> The bundled (reference) implementation was of somewhat mixed quality and >> it failed to follow standard in multiple places. This commit replaces >> it with a new one, written from scratch to follow the standard as close >>

bug#73605: [PATCH] Replace SRFI-64 with a new implementation.

2024-10-13 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi Tomas, Tomas Volf <~@wolfsden.cz> skribis: > The bundled (reference) implementation was of somewhat mixed quality and > it failed to follow standard in multiple places. This commit replaces > it with a new one, written from scratch to follow the standard as close > as possible. > > * module/s

bug#73605: [PATCH] Replace SRFI-64 with a new implementation.

2024-10-02 Thread Tomas Volf
The bundled (reference) implementation was of somewhat mixed quality and it failed to follow standard in multiple places. This commit replaces it with a new one, written from scratch to follow the standard as close as possible. * module/srfi/srfi-64/testing.scm: Delete file. * module/srfi/srfi-64