Hi Andy,
A couple of late comments...
Andy Wingo writes:
> * Much more source information propagates through the compiler and
> into the metadata now. In short, whereas before it was "expressions
> are only marked as coming from a source location if they are eq? to
> an expression
Hello!
I did some more fiddling with gsubrs:
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=guile.git;a=commitdiff;h=8321ed20f69b4c56cb680563160cd30ecac8f509
The change adds a vararg function to invoke gsubrs when the number of
arguments is known, thereby eliminating consing.
The benchmark is as foll
I just got a new laptop ([1], under the OLPH program [2]), and this
has thrown up 3 small Guile-related benefits, which I thought might be
of wider interest.
1. It has a MIPS processor, so I'll be regularly building with that
now - which is good for a bit of non-Intel and big-endian variety.
2. I
Linas Vepstas writes:
> Perhaps I'm naive, perhaps some naming convention
> could be used to indicate that SCM_OUT_OF_RANGE
> will never return? None of the functions in the call stack
> gave any real hint that they might now return; they mostly
> looked liked ordinary functions.
As Andy has s
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guile.git/commit/?id=6c59f901499937fe3779ef1f543646754f843679
Interesting - but why? Is there some wider motivation for this?
I'm not objecting... just curious!
Neil
Hello,
I pushed a commit [0] that aggregates all the `Makefile.am's under
`lang/' as a single one (as I recently did in `vm'). It should make
`automake', `config.status', `make', etc., faster, while also making the
tarball smaller.
Other candidates for aggregation include `ice-9' and `examples'.
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>> Anyway, that's where I am. Bug-wise we still have a bug in backtraces,
>> which I need to pin down at some point, and update docs -- but generally
>> speaking we're mergeable. What do people think, should I be working on
>> master at some point?
>
> Sure.
