[PATCH] Preserve additional R6RS library name components after srfi :n

2012-11-03 Thread Mark H Weaver
Hello all, Here's another patch to help with R6RS libraries. Right now, if you use R6RS syntax to import (srfi :99 records procedural), the components after the :99 will be silently dropped and it will treat this as if you imported (srfi :99). I suspect this is simply a bug. Does anyone see a r

[PATCH] Add ".guile.sls" and ".sls" to the default %load-extensions

2012-11-03 Thread Mark H Weaver
Hello all, Any objections to adding ".guile.sls" and ".sls" to Guile's default %load-extensions? Ian Price tells me that this naming convention is commonly followed for R6RS libraries and implementations, e.g. Racket, Mosh, Ikarus, and Ypsilon. It would facilitate easy use of R6RS libraries with

Re: propose deprecation of generalized-vector-*

2012-11-03 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi, Daniel Llorens skribis: >> 5. Re: propose deprecation of generalized-vector-* >> (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) > >> Yes. That procedure would only make sense for one-dimensional arrays >> anyway. It could just as well throw an error when passed a >> multi-dimensional array, no?

Re: propose deprecation of generalized-vector-*

2012-11-03 Thread Daniel Llorens
> 5. Re: propose deprecation of generalized-vector-* > (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) > Yes. That procedure would only make sense for one-dimensional arrays > anyway. It could just as well throw an error when passed a > multi-dimensional array, no? I think that there should be a fun

Re: Merging stable-2.0 into master

2012-11-03 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi Mark, Mark H Weaver skribis: > l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: >> Mark H Weaver skribis: >> >>> I went ahead and pushed a proper merge of stable-2.0 into master. >> >> Great, thanks! Which method did you use? > > I used the more elaborate method described in my earlier email, so the

Re: Merging stable-2.0 into master

2012-11-03 Thread Mark H Weaver
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > Mark H Weaver skribis: > >> I went ahead and pushed a proper merge of stable-2.0 into master. > > Great, thanks! Which method did you use? I used the more elaborate method described in my earlier email, so the git history looks like the merges that wingo