On 9 March 2013 16:25, Andy Wingo wrote:
> Should we remove the brackets entirely? i.e
I would not. The brackets are fairly standard for optional arguments.
On Sat 09 Mar 2013 02:58, Daniel Hartwig writes:
> -- Scheme Procedure: eval-string string [#:module=#f] [#:file=#f]
> [#:line=#f] [#:column=#f] [#:lang=(current-language)]
> [#:compile?=#f]
>
> we see that there is some potential confusion between the close,
> unescaped (as
On 9 March 2013 09:58, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
> On 3 March 2013 17:45, Andy Wingo wrote:
>> On Sun 03 Mar 2013 02:07, Daniel Hartwig writes:
>>
>>> Can I ask whether it is preferred to use, e.g. @code{#f}, for the
>>> default values, as some places seem to and others don't. This patch
>>> is not
On 3 March 2013 17:45, Andy Wingo wrote:
> On Sun 03 Mar 2013 02:07, Daniel Hartwig writes:
>
>> Can I ask whether it is preferred to use, e.g. @code{#f}, for the
>> default values, as some places seem to and others don't. This patch
>> is not using @code, but then, neither does it touch any doc
On Sun 03 Mar 2013 02:07, Daniel Hartwig writes:
> Can I ask whether it is preferred to use, e.g. @code{#f}, for the
> default values, as some places seem to and others don't. This patch
> is not using @code, but then, neither does it touch any doc. that was
> previously.
Good question. Do you
On 3 March 2013 03:36, Andy Wingo wrote:
> Hi Bake,
>
> On Fri 03 Feb 2012 14:28, Andy Wingo writes:
>
>> Hi Bake,
>>
>> This patch looks great. I do have a couple of comments before
>> applying. It would probably be useful to have input from others as
>> well, so I'm copying guile-devel.
>>
>>
Hi Bake,
On Fri 03 Feb 2012 14:28, Andy Wingo writes:
> Hi Bake,
>
> This patch looks great. I do have a couple of comments before
> applying. It would probably be useful to have input from others as
> well, so I'm copying guile-devel.
>
> On Mon 16 Jan 2012 20:46, Bake Timmons writes:
>> -@d
Andy Wingo writes:
> On Mon 16 Jan 2012 20:46, Bake Timmons writes:
>> -@deffn {Scheme Procedure} resolve-module name [autoload=#t]
>> [version=#f] [#:ensure=#t]
>> +@deffn {Scheme Procedure} resolve-module name [autoload=#t [version=#f]] @
>> + [#:ensure ensure=#t]
>
>
Andy Wingo writes:
> Also, it seems pedantic to repeat the keyword arguments (once as
> keyword, once as identifier). Surely #:foo=bar is unambiguous?
Since guile use the same name for both the keyword and identifier, I'd
say so.
--
Ian Price
"Programming is like pinball. The reward for doin
Hello! :-)
Andy Wingo skribis:
> On Mon 16 Jan 2012 20:46, Bake Timmons writes:
>> -@deffn {Scheme Procedure} resolve-module name [autoload=#t] [version=#f]
>> [#:ensure=#t]
>> +@deffn {Scheme Procedure} resolve-module name [autoload=#t [version=#f]] @
>> + [#:ensure
Hi Bake,
This patch looks great. I do have a couple of comments before
applying. It would probably be useful to have input from others as
well, so I'm copying guile-devel.
On Mon 16 Jan 2012 20:46, Bake Timmons writes:
> -@deffn {Scheme Procedure} resolve-module name [autoload=#t] [version=#f]
11 matches
Mail list logo
