I thought it's fixed with my patch:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2012-05/msg1.html
And Noah said it's done in the tree(I think it's stable-2.0), but I
still get the error message like this:
--error--
GNU Guile 2.0.5.182-162d9-dir
Hey!
Stefan Israelsson Tampe skribis:
> Maybe this help to see what I'm after,
>
> #'(let ((x v)) #.(f #'x))
>
> <=>
>
> (let-syntax ((g (lambda (stx) (syntax-case stx ((_ x) (f #'x)
>#'(let ((x v)) (g x))
Sorry, I fail to understand the problem you’re trying to solve.
The above idiom
Hi,
Alexei Matveev skribis:
> I assume there was a reason to introduce scm_to/from_int macros
> and that it gets defined to either -32 or -64 versions depending on
> the build/platform (not sure what else, but Guile packagers know it).
> Using a specific one invites for portability problems or a
On Mon 02 Jul 2012 09:53, Stefan Israelsson Tampe
writes:
> Anyway I can now compile simple functions to native sequences of machine code
> but with some
> tools around it so let me explain the setup.
Where is this code? Sorry for not following the context.
I agree with you that maintenance
Hello,
scm->pointer takes a Scheme value and returns a Scheme value which is a
foreign pointer to the Scheme value. It has been in Guile since 2.0 I
think.
scm_to_pointer takes a Scheme value which is a foreign pointer, and
unpacks that foregin pointer as a void*.
scm_to_pointer is a new interf
Maybe this help to see what I'm after,
#'(let ((x v)) #.(f #'x))
<=>
(let-syntax ((g (lambda (stx) (syntax-case stx ((_ x) (f #'x)
#'(let ((x v)) (g x))
Now I would like to have a corresponding #.@ notation as well but can't
find an analog
for that :-(
/Stefan
On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at
> Yeah. Though here, you could still write bindings for ‘scm_from_int32’
> (the real function) instead of ‘scm_from_int’, for instance, no?
Right.
I assume there was a reason to introduce scm_to/from_int macros
and that it gets defined to either -32 or -64 versions depending on
the build/platfor
Hi Stefan,
Stefan Israelsson Tampe skribis:
> Hygiene is harder to maintain. e.g. I kept on hitting this kind of code
> snippets
>
> #'(let ((x v))
> #,(f rest #'x))
>
> The problem with this code is hygiene, I need to make a gensym and use
> with-syntax to bound x to that gensym in order t
Hi,
Alexei Matveev skribis:
> It's ok. You may close it.
Thanks.
> I still think it could be less confusing if the libguile.so
> implemented/provided
> functions as advertised in Guile API docs for the sake of interfacing to
> languages other than C. And &scm_from_int wold also work if it wer
Hello!
Nala Ginrut skribis:
> Hmm...I still get that error message in stable-2.0 branch for ecmascript.
Which message?
Ludo’.
Quote from
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2001-06/msg00348.html
>> Do we want scm_list_0 to scm_list_9 anyway?
>
> I'd say, forget about scm_list_0. With respect to the others, we should
> at least provide those which are used in libguile (egoistic point of
> view, isn't it?). Ab
On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
>> For use from a Fortran program I am collecting API fixes for libguile.so
>> as wrapper functions for what is provided to C-programs as macros.
>> I noted that some of the macros are function-macros some are symbol
>> macros. An example o
12 matches
Mail list logo
