Hi David,
David Kastrup skribis:
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
[...]
>> The order in which files get compiled does not matter; the semantics of
>> programs do not depend on whether code is being bytecode-interpreted or
>> just interpreted by (ice-9 eval).
>
> Little things like
>
>
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Hi David,
>
> Sorry for the late reply.
>
> David Kastrup skribis:
>
>> Previous attempts have mostly exploded around the problem that we have
>> something like
>>
>> (for-each ly:load init-scheme-files)
>>
>> in our lily.scm file, and the auto-compiler at
Hi David,
Sorry for the late reply.
David Kastrup skribis:
> Previous attempts have mostly exploded around the problem that we have
> something like
>
> (for-each ly:load init-scheme-files)
>
> in our lily.scm file, and the auto-compiler attempts to compile all of
> those files independently as
Ian Hulin writes:
> Hi David, Mark,
> I am still around, I've not had much time for hacking lately as I've
> been getting sick again, and the meds tend to sap the higher brain
> functions.
I'll be taking a closer look in several days (my schedule does not
really permit me doing much before the e
Hi David, Mark,
I am still around, I've not had much time for hacking lately as I've
been getting sick again, and the meds tend to sap the higher brain
functions.
On 09/03/12 19:27, David Kastrup wrote:
> Mark H Weaver writes:
>
>> David Kastrup writes:
>>
In the long run, I think this i
Mark H Weaver writes:
> David Kastrup writes:
>
>>> In the long run, I think this is probably your best way forward, but
>>> admittedly it would require more work to make this transition.
>>
>> The main problem is that it requires such a large reorganisation of the
>> LilyPond sources that the a
David Kastrup writes:
>> In the long run, I think this is probably your best way forward, but
>> admittedly it would require more work to make this transition.
>
> The main problem is that it requires such a large reorganisation of the
> LilyPond sources that the attempts to do it in that manner
Mark H Weaver writes:
> David Kastrup writes:
>
>> How is this supposed to work for compiling and installing a package?
>> Basically,
>>
>> make all
>> sudo make install
>>
>> The usual case will be that the user calling lilypond will not have
>> write permission in the installed directories (an
David Kastrup writes:
> How is this supposed to work for compiling and installing a package?
> Basically,
>
> make all
> sudo make install
>
> The usual case will be that the user calling lilypond will not have
> write permission in the installed directories (and even if he did, like
> when calli
Mark H Weaver writes:
> David Kastrup writes:
>
>> Mark H Weaver writes:
>>
>>> Excellent! As long as you load everything in the right order, such that
>>> macros are defined before they are used, I don't see why there should be
>>> any other problems related to macros and compilation.
>>
>> B
David Kastrup writes:
> Mark H Weaver writes:
>
>> Excellent! As long as you load everything in the right order, such that
>> macros are defined before they are used, I don't see why there should be
>> any other problems related to macros and compilation.
>
> Because the individual files are no
Mark H Weaver writes:
> David Kastrup writes:
>
>> Mark H Weaver writes:
>>
>>> David Kastrup writes:
>>>
with the stable release 2.16 of LilyPond looming around the corner, it
will become imminent soon to think about supporting Guile 2.0.
Previous attempts have mostly expl
David Kastrup writes:
> Mark H Weaver writes:
>
>> David Kastrup writes:
>>
>>> with the stable release 2.16 of LilyPond looming around the corner, it
>>> will become imminent soon to think about supporting Guile 2.0.
>>>
>>> Previous attempts have mostly exploded around the problem that we hav
Mark H Weaver writes:
> David Kastrup writes:
>
>> with the stable release 2.16 of LilyPond looming around the corner, it
>> will become imminent soon to think about supporting Guile 2.0.
>>
>> Previous attempts have mostly exploded around the problem that we have
>> something like
>>
>> (for-ea
David Kastrup writes:
> with the stable release 2.16 of LilyPond looming around the corner, it
> will become imminent soon to think about supporting Guile 2.0.
>
> Previous attempts have mostly exploded around the problem that we have
> something like
>
> (for-each ly:load init-scheme-files)
>
>
Hi,
with the stable release 2.16 of LilyPond looming around the corner, it
will become imminent soon to think about supporting Guile 2.0.
Previous attempts have mostly exploded around the problem that we have
something like
(for-each ly:load init-scheme-files)
in our lily.scm file, and the aut
16 matches
Mail list logo
