Hi Andy!
Andy Wingo writes:
> On Fri 02 Mar 2012 00:40, Mark H Weaver writes:
>
>>> Here's a significantly refactored version of my 'tree-il->scheme'
>>> improvements.
>
> All look great to me, please push. Some time soon after you do it,
> would you mind also handling the merge to master?
Ex
Hey!
Andy Wingo skribis:
> How do you feel about raising an error if primitive-fork is called, and
> there are other threads running?
I think I’d prefer a solution where libguile-internal threads and locks
are suitably handled upon fork (basically what wip-threads-and-fork
does), and where user
Hi Ludo :)
Picking up some loose ends...
On Wed 08 Feb 2012 14:44, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> What do you think of adding a ‘cancel’ primitive to futures?
It sounds good, but tricky to implement. I'm also not sure it's exactly
the right interface -- for example, Java seems to hav
On Fri 02 Mar 2012 02:35, David Kastrup writes:
> Sure, but things like gensym and make-prompt-tag (and (list '()) for
> creating an eq?-unique object) are artificial hygiene coming at a cost
> in symbol table and symbol generation time rather than "lexical"
> hygiene.
"Hygiene" is not right the
Hi David,
On Fri 02 Mar 2012 01:00, David Kastrup writes:
> Is there a way to get a call-with-current-continuation that does not
> create a stack copy?
This is usually referred to as `call-with-escape-continuation'.
For example, here are Racket's words on the topic:
http://docs.racket-lang
Hi Mark!
On Fri 02 Mar 2012 00:40, Mark H Weaver writes:
>> Here's a significantly refactored version of my 'tree-il->scheme'
>> improvements.
All look great to me, please push. Some time soon after you do it,
would you mind also handling the merge to master?
Only a few small points:
> +(def
Hi!
Thanks for the excellent patches and rationale.
On Fri 02 Mar 2012 19:34, Mark H Weaver writes:
> Therefore, the relevant question here is: is there ever a case where
> someone is going to call 'datum->syntax' on one of these introduced
> syntax objects?
Certainly not in psyntax-pp.scm, wh
Hello :)
On Thu 01 Mar 2012 20:35, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> I still think that saying that “a guile built with threads […] should
> not call primitive-fork” is too strong, because again, it’s very, very
> unlikely to fail when (= 1 (length (all-threads))), GNU/Linux or not.
OK, a
Hi,
I have pushed a patch to master that changes the implementation of the
dynamic stack from being a linked list on the heap to being an actual
stack. This allows us to push items on the stack in many cases without
allocating memory at all.
This has become particularly important in `master', be
