Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How about the following:
Guile is a GNU project, let's stick to the good old and widely
understood ChangeLog style rather than rolling our own format.
Thanks,
Ludo'.
See autobuild report at
http://autobuild.josefsson.org/guile/log-200809031421908407000.txt
The problem seems to be the heap mutex in scm_leave_guile.
(gdb) i thr
4 process 89960 0x7f7ffd73370a in _lwp_park () from /usr/lib/libc.so.12
3 process 155496 0x7f7ffd732c4a in read () from
Hello!
On Tue 02 Sep 2008 21:56, Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> SCM
>> scm_m_let (SCM expr, SCM env)
>> ...
>> /* plain let */
>> SCM rvariables;
>> SCM inits;
>> transform_bindings (bindings, expr, &rvariables, &inits);
>>
>> {
>> con
On Sun 31 Aug 2008 17:12, Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On a tangent, is anyone still seriously considering to run Emacs atop GUILE?
> (It looks a bit like a travesty if we're trying to accomodate elisp while
> also trying to follow standards like SRFI-x and RxRS)
I think it ma
On Wed 03 Sep 2008 19:35, Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How about the following:
>
>
> - Provide a description in the commit message, like so:
>
> 1-line description of change
>
> More extensive discussion of your change. Document why you are
> changing things.
>
> * file
Hi,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> After discussion with Andy on IRC and looking for uses for `scm_i_' in
> Google's codesearch, I've become convinced that we'd better not make
> this change in 1.8 so that we don't break existing code. That means
> reverting these commits:
>
> bc5
Hi,
Andy Wingo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed 03 Sep 2008 19:35, Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> How about the following:
>>
>>
>> - Provide a description in the commit message, like so:
>>
>> 1-line description of change
>>
>> More extensive discussion of your change.
Andy Wingo escreveu:
> On Sun 31 Aug 2008 17:12, Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> On a tangent, is anyone still seriously considering to run Emacs atop GUILE?
>> (It looks a bit like a travesty if we're trying to accomodate elisp while
>> also trying to follow standards like SRFI-
I don't know why I'm answering this, but...
On Thu 04 Sep 2008 17:10, Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well, I remember having a flamewar with RMS about language agnosticism
> and running emacs on GUILE about 8 years ago, and I don't think we
> have progressed much since then. Extr
