Hello all,
At present, compile-time warnings can only be enabled, not disabled, and
there is no way to enable all warnings. This means that the set of
warnings has to be hard-coded into every build system. This is terrible
because it means that every time we add a new warning type, users won't
b
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 12:53 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
>> * R7RS feature identifiers: r7rs, exact-closed, ratios, exact-complex,
>> ieee-float, full-unicode, windows, posix, unix, darwin, linux, bsd,
>> freebsd, solaris, i386, x86-64, ppc, sparc, jvm, clr, llvm, ilp32,
>> lp64, ilp64, bi
Hi Mark,
Mark H Weaver skribis:
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
>> Mark H Weaver skribis:
[...]
>>> * R7RS feature identifiers: r7rs, exact-closed, ratios, exact-complex,
>>> ieee-float, full-unicode, windows, posix, unix, darwin, linux, bsd,
>>> freebsd, solaris, i386, x86-64,
Hi Mark,
Mark H Weaver skribis:
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>> However, could it be done in the tree-il/analyze.scm instead, along with
>> other warning passes?
>
> The problem is that 'case' does not exist in tree-il. By the time
> analyze.scm sees it, 'case' has been transformed
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Mark H Weaver skribis:
>
>> * bytevectors in core R7RS
>
> What does it mean? That bindings are available by default?
Yes.
>> * R7RS feature identifiers: r7rs, exact-closed, ratios, exact-complex,
>> ieee-float, full-unicode, windows, posix, unix, dar
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> However, could it be done in the tree-il/analyze.scm instead, along with
> other warning passes?
The problem is that 'case' does not exist in tree-il. By the time
analyze.scm sees it, 'case' has been transformed into nested 'if's with
'memv's. In theory,
Neil Jerram writes:
> It turns out that no Guile fixes are needed after all. So as far as
> Guile on armel is concerned, we only need a new libgc release.
OK, that sounds good; by default, I think I'll wait for that. Though if
it wasn't too difficult to come up with a reasonable patch, we coul
Neil Jerram writes:
> First of all, thanks for pushing 2.0.5 into Debian so quickly!
After a decent bit of work last year, I integrated my Debian development
directly into the Guile git tree (including much of the older history).
That, the fact that I don't have to split 2.0, and git-dpm/git-dch
Neil Jerram writes:
> On the assumption of using recent libgc git source, I'm still working on
> what Guile fixes, if any, are needed on top of that, for armel. I have
> a set of fixes that works, but it may not be a minimal set.
It turns out that no Guile fixes are needed after all. So as far
Hi Rob,
First of all, thanks for pushing 2.0.5 into Debian so quickly!
Rob Browning writes:
> Neil Jerram writes:
>
>> Rob Browning writes:
>
>>> So do I understand correctly that in order for this to work, we'll first
>>> need an updated libgc in Debian unstable?
>>
>> Yes.
It appears to me
10 matches
Mail list logo
