Re: ‘match’ and “k or more” patterns

On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 12:04 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > > GNU Guile 1.9 now uses your implementation of ‘match’ as a nice > replacement for Wright’s implementation, so thank you! > > I stumbled upon this incompatibility: Wright’s ‘match’ supports ‘..1’, > ‘..2’, etc., which mean “1 or more”, “2

Re: ‘match’ and “k or more” patterns

Hi, [Re-adding Cc: guile-de...@gnu.org.] Alex Shinn writes: > On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 12:04 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> >> GNU Guile 1.9 now uses your implementation of ‘match’ as a nice >> replacement for Wright’s implementation, so thank you! >> >> I stumbled upon this incompatibility: Wrig

Re: FFI supports callbacks

Hi! "Jose A. Ortega Ruiz" writes: > On Sun, Sep 05 2010, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > >> Hi there! >> >> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: >> >>> BTW, while we’re at it, how about make-foreign-function => >>> pointer->procedure? >> >> We briefly discussed this on IRC. One issue with the >> ‘p

Re: program-module returns a non-module

On Sun 05 Sep 2010 12:28, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > Hmm ‘compile-assembly.scm’ has this ‘*module*’ variable, which seems to > relate to this. Needs more investigation... Together with make-object-table's consing a #f onto the front of the returned table, this ensures that any obje

Re: program-module returns a non-module

Hi, On Sun 05 Sep 2010 02:25, "Jose A. Ortega Ruiz" writes: > (define cp (module-ref (current-module) 'cons)) > > (program? cp) => #t > (program-module cp) => # > (module? (program-module cp)) => #f > > Since `cp' above is a program, i was expecting the return value to be > always a modu

Re: FFI supports callbacks

On Mon 06 Sep 2010 00:23, "Jose A. Ortega Ruiz" writes: > procedure-from-foreign-function / foreign-function-to-procedure > procedure-to-foreign-function / foreign-function-from-procedure > > procedure-from-foreign / foreign-to-procedure > procedure-to-foreign / foreign-from-procedure I don't th

Re: FFI supports callbacks

Greets, On Sun 05 Sep 2010 17:10, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > >> BTW, while we’re at it, how about make-foreign-function => >> pointer->procedure? > > We briefly discussed this on IRC. One issue with the > ‘pointer->procedure’ name is that ‘

need: scm_from_{utf8,latin1}_{string,symbol,keyword}

Hi, In our C source, we have been trained to use scm_from_locale_string et al. This is usually the right thing to do when interacting with the operating system. However, when we have literals in C source code, I think this strategy is incorrect. I write my C source code in UTF-8 or in ISO-8859-1,

Re: need: scm_from_{utf8,latin1}_{string,symbol,keyword}

> From: Andy Wingo [...] > The solution is to use functions that specify the locale. We don't have > those yet, but we do have the capability to write them > now. Specifically: > >scm_from_utf8_string > scm_from_utf8_symbol >scm_from_utf8_keyword > > scm_from_latin1_string >

Re: need: scm_from_{utf8,latin1}_{string,symbol,keyword}

Greetings, On Mon 06 Sep 2010 18:28, Mike Gran writes: > there is a failure case to consider for scm_from_utf8_string. The C > utf8 string could contain incorrectly encoded data. There is the analogous case of scm_to_locale_string, if the string is not encodable in the current locale. > You c

Re: need: scm_from_{utf8,latin1}_{string,symbol,keyword}

Hello, Andy Wingo writes: > However, when we have literals in C source code, I think this strategy > is incorrect. I write my C source code in UTF-8 or in ISO-8859-1, but if > the user is running in another locale, they will not load my > strings/symbols/keywords correctly. Actually locale enco

Re: FFI supports callbacks

On Mon, Sep 06 2010, Andy Wingo wrote: [...] > Also consider that this is a low-level interface; presumably people > should be programming with some sort of `define-c-wrapper' macro that > presents a nicer interface. Is anyone working on this? I happen to quite like the design presented in the