Re: binary-port?

l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > Hi, > > Andreas Rottmann writes: > >> - Ikarus and Ypsilon definitly have disjoint ports. >> >> - Racket natively has ports that will accept both binary and textual >> operations, but it's R6RS support wraps these ports so that the >> resulting R6RS po

scheme -> c

Hi, I am playing with stack semantics inspired from the prolog code and heading towards a more clean construction where we can have it live in both scheme and c. The idea is to program like programming in scheme but outputting a subset of pure c code e.g. no gotos and the loops inspired by named l

Re: Patch: New section "Invoking Guile" for chapter "Programming in Scheme"

> > > On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 04:33:44PM +0200, Andy Wingo wrote: > >> your patches should be "atomic" > > > > "3. No patch introduces a regression: after applying any > > initial part of the series, the resulting project still > > compiles and works, and has no bugs that it didn’t have > > bef

macro fu question

Hi, I'm working on a small environment to verify macros like the syntax-parse framework. The idea is to use the tools I've already made for guile/scheme. I will explain this a little more in detail if anyone is interested. Here I just focus here on a question about how to use the macro system to

Re: Indexing Scheme and C identifiers separately

Hello Mark, Le Sun, 24 Apr 2011 18:43:54 -0400, Mark Harig a écrit : > On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 07:09:07PM -0300, David Pirotte wrote: [...] > What would be of some help to get this project started is a > list of the identifiers: > > 1) A list of all Scheme procedure names > 2) A list of al

Might consider this a bug?

Well, this is a little interesting, but rare situation. I wonder if this could be considered a bug. That is: When you set up yourself a locale in system configuration but doesn't actually have that locale installed, the whole system will still work, but with some prompts. However guile won't start

Re: Trouble joining with threads from C

Hello! Andy Wingo writes: > On Mon 25 Apr 2011 15:53, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: [...] >> Currently they all pass, but ‘test-scm-spawn-thread’ hits a libgc >> assertion failure (“Duplicate large block deallocation”) once every 5 >> runs or so: > > I guess we disable this one then?

Re: binary-port?

On Mon 25 Apr 2011 16:08, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > I wouldn’t want the “native” port type to be disjoint from the R6RS port > types, notably because there’s no “native” equivalent to the R6RS binary > I/O API, and also because it would hamper composition of R6RS and > non-R6RS code

Re: Trouble joining with threads from C

On Mon 25 Apr 2011 15:53, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > Attached are 3 tests: one for Mark’s bug, and two for #32436. o/~ did you ever know that you're my h-r o/~ > Currently they all pass, but ‘test-scm-spawn-thread’ hits a libgc > assertion failure (“Duplicate large block de

Re: binary-port?

Hi, Andreas Rottmann writes: > l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: However, I’m wondering whether we should not just squarely do away with the binary/textual distinction, and just write: (define (binary-port? p) #t) What do people with experience with pure R6R

Re: Trouble joining with threads from C

Hello! Andy Wingo writes: > When do you propose that the cleanup handlers for the thread be called? > > As far as I understand things, reliably cleaning up after the thread > *requires* the use of pthread_key with a destructor. It is the only way > to attach a cleanup callback to a thread. It'

Re: binary-port?

l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > Hi Andreas! > > Andreas Rottmann writes: > >> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > > [...] > >>> However, I’m wondering whether we should not just squarely do away with >>> the binary/textual distinction, and just write: >>> >>> (define (binary-port?

guile-zmq, a zeromq binding for Guile

Hello all, I forgot about something I did last month, which was to write a zeromq binding for Guile 2.0. See http://zeromq.org/, for more. The web page is at: http://www.zeromq.org/bindings:guile-binding And the code may be had at gitorious: https://gitorious.org/guile-zmq Happy hack

Re: Patch: New section "Invoking Guile" for chapter "Programming in Scheme"

Hi Mark, On Sun 24 Apr 2011 23:58, Mark Harig writes: > On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 11:00:16PM +0200, Andy Wingo wrote: >> >> Right, at the end of applying all of your patches, I'm sure that's the >> case; however the first patch adds an @include without adding the >> appropriate file, so applying