Ian Price writes:
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
>>> * Figure out a way to make Guildhall modules that will be overridden by
>>> a matching module in core guile (if it exists). This is important for
>>> SRFIs. Ian Price's Guildhall repository contains portable
>>> implemention
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Court$(D+2(Bs) writes:
>> * Figure out a way to make Guildhall modules that will be overridden by
>> a matching module in core guile (if it exists). This is important for
>> SRFIs. Ian Price's Guildhall repository contains portable
>> implementions of several SRFIs
On 6 Nov 2012, at 19:28, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Hans Aberg skribis:
>
>> On 5 Nov 2012, at 22:02, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Hans,
>>
>> Hi Ludo,
>>
>>> Hans Aberg skribis:
>>>
On 5 Nov 2012, at 19:11, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> I think time has come for 2.0.7.
Hi Mark,
Mark H Weaver skribis:
> Here are the items from my TODO list that I hope to do for 2.0.7:
> (and if anyone else wants to do any of these, that would be great!)
>
> * Move docs for SRFI-9 records into the "Compound Data Types" section of
> the manual, and move docs for the older struc
nalaginrut skribis:
> And don't forget SRFI-105 ;-D
It’s already in.
> And what about the status of ethread?
We were still debating whether to include it, how, etc. So not for this
time.
Ludo’.
Hi Bruce,
Bruce Korb skribis:
> I think it would be Really Nice if it were not fiddling LD_LIBRARY_PATH
> by the next release.
Right, thanks for the reminder. I’ll see where we left it...
Ludo’.
Hi,
Hans Aberg skribis:
> On 5 Nov 2012, at 22:02, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
>> Hi Hans,
>
> Hi Ludo,
>
>> Hans Aberg skribis:
>>
>>> On 5 Nov 2012, at 19:11, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>>>
I think time has come for 2.0.7. I suggest scheduling it for Week 48,
WDYT?
>>>
>>> FYI, this is
nalaginrut writes:
> And don't forget SRFI-105 ;-D
SRFI-105 is already in.
Mark
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> I think time has come for 2.0.7. I suggest scheduling it for Week 48,
> WDYT?
Sounds good!
Here are the items from my TODO list that I hope to do for 2.0.7:
(and if anyone else wants to do any of these, that would be great!)
* Move docs for SRFI-9 record
On Mon, 2012-11-05 at 19:11 +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I think time has come for 2.0.7. I suggest scheduling it for Week 48,
> WDYT?
>
> By then, we should essentially squash as many bugs as possible.
>
> New features we may want to include:
>
> - functional setters, for SRFI
On 11/05/12 10:11, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I think time has come for 2.0.7. I suggest scheduling it for Week 48,
> WDYT?
I think it would be Really Nice if it were not fiddling LD_LIBRARY_PATH
by the next release.
> By then, we should essentially squash as many bugs as possible.
th
On 5 Nov 2012, at 22:02, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi Hans,
Hi Ludo,
> Hans Aberg skribis:
>
>> On 5 Nov 2012, at 19:11, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>>
>>> I think time has come for 2.0.7. I suggest scheduling it for Week 48,
>>> WDYT?
>>
>> FYI, this is the last week of November - a lot of count
Hi Hans,
Hans Aberg skribis:
> On 5 Nov 2012, at 19:11, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
>> I think time has come for 2.0.7. I suggest scheduling it for Week 48,
>> WDYT?
>
> FYI, this is the last week of November - a lot of countries do not use this
> week numbering system.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.o
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) skribis:
> - assertion failure hit when running srfi-18.test in a loop
This one turned out to be easy (it could be reproduced by running the
"sleeping threads notified of abandonment" in a loop), and is fixed by
02a362a. Cool! :-)
Ludo’.
On 5 Nov 2012, at 19:11, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> I think time has come for 2.0.7. I suggest scheduling it for Week 48,
> WDYT?
FYI, this is the last week of November - a lot of countries do not use this
week numbering system.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven-day_week#Week_numbering
15 matches
Mail list logo
