On Thu 23 May 2013 06:05, Noah Lavine writes:
> An update: I just rebased wip-rtl-cps on top of wip-rtl-may-2013 and
> pushed. The most interesting thing was how trivial it was: all I had to
> do was make a one-line change in how I called `begin-program'.
Great, thank you! I'll take a look soon
An update: I just rebased wip-rtl-cps on top of wip-rtl-may-2013 and
pushed. The most interesting thing was how trivial it was: all I had to do
was make a one-line change in how I called `begin-program'.
Best,
Noah
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 12:33 AM, Noah Lavine wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, May 21
Hello,
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Andy Wingo wrote:
> You should have two names: the original ones and the gensyms that come
> from tree-il. Creating new gensyms should happen when copying or
> fabricating new nodes, as peval does, but in most cases you don't need
> to do it, and in any c
On Tue 21 May 2013 05:21, Noah Lavine writes:
> * Missing distinction between original names and unique names.
>
>
> Yes, I agree. I think it even reuses original names sometimes, which is
> not good. I should just rename everything.
You should have two names: the original ones and the
Hello,
Thanks for the review.
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Andy Wingo wrote:
> Some first thoughts on the CPS language, just after having looked at
> (language cps):
>
> * Overall looking really good.
>
Thanks! You may choose to retract that after you see the other files, of
course. :-)
Some first thoughts on the CPS language, just after having looked at
(language cps):
* Overall looking really good.
* License blocks are missing.
* Toplevel comments should be prefixed by ";;; " (three semicolons).
* Overview could go in the module commentary section.
* Missing distinctio
