characters such as "[::1]]]".
Also, the character group does not include a "." which is valid in
ipv6 addresses with dotted-quad notation[1]. This is introduced by
the 0002 patch (see below).
0001 provides additional test cases handling domains names starting
with numbers as w
On 6 July 2012 19:15, Andy Wingo wrote:
> On Wed 22 Feb 2012 07:15, Daniel Hartwig writes:
>
>> Bumping this bug report as it is relevant to commit 1868309 which
>> recently addressed the issue with domain names starting with numbers.
>
> Sorry for the long dela
On 7 August 2012 00:37, Ian Price wrote:
> Patrick Bernaud writes:
>
>> With auto compilation turned on, it looks like the problem can not be
>> reproduced.
That is to say, when using --fresh-auto-compile.
>
> I cannot reproduce this on 32 bit fedora 16 with guile (GNU Guile)
> 2.0.6-dirty (com
On 7 October 2012 05:41, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Daniel Hartwig skribis:
>
>> (define x (bytevector->pointer (make-bytevector len 1)))
>> (define a (pointer-address x))
>> (display x)(newline)
>> (my-guardian x)
>> ;(my-guardian (pointer->
On 8 October 2012 04:38, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>>> This is expected to fail: ‘bytevector->pointer’ creates a weak reference
>>> from the returned pointer object to the given bytevector. So when the
>>> pointer object is reclaimed, the bytevector can be reclaimed too, hence
>>> the problem you’re
On 8 October 2012 21:44, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> On 8 October 2012 04:38, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Right. But then the pointer is being collected even though it remains
>> inside the guardian, in the example it is never extracted from there.
>
> Well, when the object reaches the guardian’s zo
On 8 November 2012 04:40, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> scheme@(guile-user)> (use-modules (web client) (web uri))
> scheme@(guile-user)> (http-get (string->uri
> "http://www.gnu.org/does-not-exist";))
> web/http.scm:191:11: In procedure read-header:
> web/http.scm:191:11: Bad uri header component: gnu
On 9 November 2012 04:10, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> * TODO build-uri validation is broken/less strict and will now pass
>> relative-refs, so maybe introduce build-uri-reference instead
>
> Yes. Should uri-reference be a disjoint type, then?
It needn't be, as long as there are predicates to disti
On 10 November 2012 04:52, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Anyway, I think it’s fine if the documentation makes it clear whether
> functions expect absolute or relative URIs. WDYT?
Yes. With the new predicates, it should be clear enough to use the
(pseudo-)type names in the usual scheme-doc way:
--
On 24 November 2012 06:19, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Any update on that? The plan is to release 2.0.7 next week, so it’d be
> great if this could be in.
I have made a first attempt at the doc strings and manual. This
involved first syncronizing the two, as only the manual had been
receiving upda
On 24 November 2012 23:10, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Personally I am not 100% on this, but I attach it for comment anyway.
>> I will not be able to work on it again for a short while.
>>
>> A quick solution may be to silently introduce just enough to fix the
>> current bug, and worry about the ext
On 27 November 2012 07:13, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) skribis:
>
>> So for now, I’d go with this patch, which fixes the bug at hand:
>
> I just applied this patch as 261af76.
>
+;; emacs: (put 'declare-relative-uri-header! 'scheme-indent-function 1)
+(define (declare-
On 27 November 2012 20:50, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Sure. But then again, the goal was just to have a hack that would solve
> the problem initially reported here, while waiting for a proper fix.
Avoiding an obvious parser error, but introducing subtle problems with
the objects. The reported bug
On 28 November 2012 10:32, nalaginrut wrote:
>> > scheme@(guile-user)> (format #t "\033[32;31mhello\033[5m")
>>
>> Here, \0 is taken to mean #\nul, and then there are two #\3.
>>
>> IOW, there is no such syntax for octal escapes (info "(guile) String
>> Syntax").
>>
>> What made you think otherwis
> The page at http://www.gnu.org/software/goops/ is for a package that was
> merged into Guile about 10 years ago. Can you please make it redirect
> permanently to the following page in the Guile manual:
>
> http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/manual/html_node/GOOPS.html
Closing. The redirect is
Mark H Weaver wrote:
> ice-9/mapping.scm:97:48: warning: possibly wrong number of arguments to
> `hashx-get-handle'
> ice-9/mapping.scm:94:48: warning: possibly unbound variable
> `hashx-create-handle'
This module is quite ancient, and, in addition to these warnings, has
not worked for some ti
Straight out of (guile) Hash Table Examples:
scheme@(guile-user)> (define h (make-vector 7 '()))
scheme@(guile-user)> (hashq-set! h 'foo "bar")
ERROR: In procedure hashq-set!:
ERROR: In procedure scm_hash_fn_create_handle_x: Wrong type argument in
position 1 (expecting hash-table): #(() () () ()
On 28 November 2012 23:56, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
> A short module, it is not hard to fix
I was after a ten minute distraction, so tackled this. See attached.
0001-fix-and-update-ice-9-mapping.patch
Description: Binary data
On 30 November 2012 04:13, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> I removed the faulty example from the doc, thanks!
Ok. The attached patch cleans up some more references to this.
I did not find a mention in NEWS, although I see that the
functionality was removed in Jan 2011 and the commit indicates it was
d
Package: guile
Version: 2.0.7
Severity: minor
Dear maintainer
The REPL prompt option accepts #f, strings, thunks, and procedures of
one argument. However, only the first two can be set using the
meta-command ,option; one must use repl-option-set! for thunks and
procedures.
It seems that VALUE i
uot;~20@y" val)
(newline
scheme@(guile-user)> (use-modules (system repl common))
scheme@(guile-user)> (repl-option-set! (car (fluid-ref *repl-stack*)) 'print
repl-print*)
scheme@(guile-user)> (iota 20)
$2 = (0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 …)
>From b0cadcb69a12a4ed2a205f4854af41bf926da20b M
On 4 December 2012 13:19, nalaginrut wrote:
> Hi Daniel!
> I believe this patch simplified my work, and 'colorized' module has been
> finished, I'm testing and debugging.
> I'll post it when it's all done.
Glad to hear it.
Attached is an alternate patch that handles before-print-hook and
*unspec
On 4 December 2012 14:39, Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote:
> () Daniel Hartwig
> () Tue, 4 Dec 2012 13:34:52 +0800
>
>patch that handles [...] *unspecified*
>
> Can ‘unspecified?’ (the procedure) be used? I seem to recall people
> wanting to avoid using ‘*unspecified*’ (the u
Version: 2.0.7
# stable-2.0, around commit: 3d2b267
# ./configure (no arguments)
hash.test has a failing case:
FAIL: tests/hash.test: hash-set and hash-ref:
;; 1/2 and 2/4 are equal? and eqv? but not eq?
(pass-if (equal? #f
(let ((table (make-hash-table)))
* test-suite/tests/00-socket.test:
* test-suite/tests/alist.test:
* test-suite/tests/elisp.test:
* test-suite/tests/encoding-iso88591.test:
* test-suite/tests/encoding-iso88597.test:
* test-suite/tests/encoding-utf8.test:
* test-suite/tests/hash.test:
* test-suite/tests/i18n.test:
* test-suite/test
On 18 February 2013 17:16, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Daniel Hartwig skribis:
>
>> scheme@(guile-user)> (define x 1/2)
>> scheme@(guile-user)> (eq? x 2/4)
>> $7 = #f
>> scheme@(guile-user)> ,optimize (eq? x 2/4)
>> $8 = (eq? x 1/2)
>>
On 19 February 2013 09:55, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
> * test-suite/tests/00-socket.test:
> * test-suite/tests/alist.test:
> * test-suite/tests/elisp.test:
> * test-suite/tests/encoding-iso88591.test:
> * test-suite/tests/encoding-iso88597.test:
> * test-suite/tests/encoding-utf8.te
On 24 February 2013 18:45, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Daniel Hartwig writes:
>> * Terminology
>>
>> The terminology used in latest URI spec. (RFC 3986) is not widely used
>> elsewhere. Not by Guile, not by the HTTP spec., or other sources.
>&g
On 25 February 2013 08:06, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> Andy Wingo writes:
>
>> On Sun 24 Feb 2013 21:14, Mark H Weaver writes:
>>
>>> Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see any semantic problem here,
>>> and it seems straightforward to implement. 'char-ready?' should simply
>>> read bytes unti
Hello
Which version of guile are you using? Is it from recent git? There
are perhaps related fixes to the web modules made since January.
On 2 March 2013 15:21, Jason Earl wrote:
>
> response.scm does not seem to handle the case where the server does not
> specify a content length. Here's a m
On 3 March 2013 03:36, Andy Wingo wrote:
> Hi Bake,
>
> On Fri 03 Feb 2012 14:28, Andy Wingo writes:
>
>> Hi Bake,
>>
>> This patch looks great. I do have a couple of comments before
>> applying. It would probably be useful to have input from others as
>> well, so I'm copying guile-devel.
>>
>>
Hello
On 8 March 2013 16:39, Patrick Pan wrote:
> 6.9.8 Procedures with Setters
>
> A procedure with setter is a special kind of procedure which normally
> behaves like any
> accessor procedure, that is a procedure which accesses a data
> structure. The difference is
> that this kind of procedure
On 3 March 2013 12:55, Jason Earl wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 02 2013, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
>
>> Hello
>>
>> Which version of guile are you using? Is it from recent git? There
>> are perhaps related fixes to the web modules made since January.
>
> Dang it. I
On 8 March 2013 06:28, Andy Wingo wrote:
> On Thu 24 Jan 2013 23:13, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
>> scheme@(guile-user)> (use-modules(web client)(web uri))
>> scheme@(guile-user)> (http-get (string->uri "http://www.sqlite.org/";))
>> web/http.scm:768:6: In procedure parse-asctime-date
On 3 March 2013 17:45, Andy Wingo wrote:
> On Sun 03 Mar 2013 02:07, Daniel Hartwig writes:
>
>> Can I ask whether it is preferred to use, e.g. @code{#f}, for the
>> default values, as some places seem to and others don't. This patch
>> is not using @code, but th
On 9 March 2013 09:58, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
> On 3 March 2013 17:45, Andy Wingo wrote:
>> On Sun 03 Mar 2013 02:07, Daniel Hartwig writes:
>>
>>> Can I ask whether it is preferred to use, e.g. @code{#f}, for the
>>> default values, as some places seem to and
On 9 March 2013 09:41, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
> A survey of HTTP sites I performed
> last year as research for another header issue in Guile showed
> something like 1% of those sites using the numeric timezone format,
> contrary to the specification.
Reference: <http://debb
On 8 March 2013 05:32, Andy Wingo wrote:
> On Tue 05 Mar 2013 20:17, "David A. Wheeler" writes:
>
>> I reported:
>>> > Guile's peek-char has a bug; it incorrectly *consumes* eof instead of
>>> > just reporting it.
>>
>> Andy Wingo replied:
>>> I have the feeling that for interactive use, if you e
On 9 March 2013 16:21, Andy Wingo wrote:
> On Sat 09 Mar 2013 02:41, Daniel Hartwig writes:
>
>> Interpretting ‘+’ timezone is sensible in a robust implementation,
>
> Yes, I agree, this makes sense.
>
>> though what to do if a numeric timezone is given other than
On 10 March 2013 06:59, Jason Earl wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 09 2013, Andy Wingo wrote:
>
>> On Sat 09 Mar 2013 02:27, Daniel Hartwig writes:
>>
>>> It is anyway clear that ‘response-body-port’ is missing the case where
>>> a content-length header is not present a
On 9 March 2013 16:25, Andy Wingo wrote:
> Should we remove the brackets entirely? i.e
I would not. The brackets are fairly standard for optional arguments.
On 10 March 2013 01:11, David A. Wheeler wrote:
> Daniel Hartwig:
>> and when read-char and peek-char return the former
>> value it is only to signal a _current_ lack of characters and should
>> not be considered part of the character stream read from the port.
>
> If
On 14 March 2013 23:00, Andy Wingo wrote:
> On Thu 14 Mar 2013 14:34, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
Ok. What about Ludo's original comment, about the extra space in the
sqlite header?
>>>
>>> Dunno. Is it common?
In the sample data from last year there were no instances of
On 15 March 2013 15:08, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
> Ludo’s patch can be applied with support for arbitrary timezones
> removed.
Actually, Appendix C (RFC 2616) recommends converting non-GMT tz to GMT:
If an HTTP header incorrectly carries a date value with a time
zone other than GMT, it M
See attached for handling of numeric time zones that may or may not be
GMT.
>From 430fc9498ee08f6d06b5ec494a5d65e395c6c067 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Daniel Hartwig
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 22:25:10 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] web http: parse numeric time zones in headers
* module/web/http.
On 13 March 2013 19:05, Andy Wingo wrote:
> What's the status here, Daniel? Would be nice to fix this bug one way
> or another for 2.0.8.
Latest work attached, updated as per discussion with Mark.
Still missing #:base-uri (RFC 3986 #5.2) and some polish.
For the docs, I believe it best to foll
On 23 March 2013 18:41, Stefan Israelsson Tampe wrote:
> Consider this simple exmple with fluids and reodos via propmts,
>
> (define (f x)
> (let ((s (make-fluid 0)))
> (with-fluids ((s 0))
> (let lp ((i 0))
>(cond ((>= i 100) (fluid-ref s))
> ((= i 50)
On 3 April 2013 15:59, Aleix Conchillo Flaqué wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was doing a test using gnutls and connecting to twitter api
> services. Example attached.
>
> I successfully passed the TLS/SSL part, but then I got this HTTP bad
> header issue. I am running Guile 2.0.5 from Debian/unstable but
> cu
On 3 April 2013 18:33, Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote:
> () Daniel Hartwig
> () Wed, 3 Apr 2013 17:47:01 +0800
>
>Apparently we are supposed to do this a bit more and accomodate yet
>another non-compliant service?
>
> Maybe that stuff should be exposed to the user. Do a bes
On 3 April 2013 20:32, Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote:
> () Daniel Hartwig
> () Wed, 3 Apr 2013 18:47:22 +0800
>
>Interesting. Though this does gradually erode the type barrier
>erected by the web module. I am reluctant to cede this territory.
>
> I suppose playin
On 13 June 2013 21:31, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Jan Schukat skribis:
>> The other question is the read syntax (one of the primary reasons I'm
>> doing all this). If alignment is something that should be preserved in
>> the permanent representation, you also need to store it in the flags,
>> since
Package: guile
Version: 2.0.3
Tags: patch
Many of the list-style headers from (web http) do not validate
correctly. The test suite only checks that the header's parse and
does not test the associated validators.
Attached is a very quick patch (0002) which exposes the failing
validators through t
ime))
This approach completely ignores the recommended way of determining
whether a response has expired. See section 13.2.4 of the RFC for
calculations involving various factors such as the time that a request
was sent, "Cache-Control" directives, etc.
Regards
Daniel
From dcb
cases for some other headers. Will file a new
bug if needed after investigation.
Regards
Daniel
On 23 November 2011 02:18, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
> Package: guile
> Version: 2.0.3
> Tags: patch
>
> Many of the list-style headers from (web http) do not validate
> correctly. The te
On 22 December 2011 10:51, Andy Wingo wrote:
>
> On Sun 27 Nov 2011 05:39, Daniel Hartwig writes:
>
>> This is definitely a bug on Guile's part, HTTP/1.1 permits such values
>> for "Expires" headers [1], treating them as though they were a date in
>&g
haven't been, due to misconfiguration. In this
case I'd rather throw an error than parse it (wrongly) to
date-in-the-past.
Given those points, I have attached a patch implementing the suggested
handling for "Expires" and will take a look at perhaps relaxing
parse-date (and others)
literals. I'm yet to found a very elegant way to do this though it is
easy enough to simply butcher `authority-pat'.
From 9fced395b4afb4e022414a4b451a50b31ceacedd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Daniel Hartwig
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2011 17:49:37 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] support URIs with domain na
On 30 December 2011 18:14, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
>
> `string->uri' requires similar changes to support the ipv6 address
> literals. I'm yet to found a very elegant way to do this though it is
> easy enough to simply butcher `authority-pat'.
So the issue was reall
On 13 January 2012 04:14, Aleix Conchillo Flaqué wrote:
> Whenever eof is reach in a port, a call to unread-char passing eof
> triggers an error. I'm not sure what's the right behavior for this,
> but I guess the way it is now is just as the user should be
> responsible to check eof.
The user sho
On 17 January 2012 02:57, Aleix Conchillo Flaqué wrote:
>
> I totally agree. However, I think the documentation should help any
> kind of user level. The documentation also does not say of any kind of
> error reported by the function.
Nor are type errors mentioned by most other functions, they ar
On 18 January 2012 08:57, Aleix Conchillo Flaqué wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
>>
>> Nor are type errors mentioned by most other functions, they are simply
>> implied. This convention is mentioned in the revised report [1]:
>>
61 matches
Mail list logo
