SRFI-204 (Current version of Alex Shinn's pattern matcher, with some mods for R6RS, etc.)

Hello! I am the author of SRFI-204 and Guile is one of the implementations I used to test it. If anyone has any feedback you can subscribe to the mailing list at https://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-204/ . I think finalization will be coming soon (not right now, I just submitted a new draft). Thank you v

[PATCH 2/2] Fix suspendable implementation of 'get-bytevector-some!'

* module/ice-9/suspendable-ports.scm (get-bytevector-some!): Fix incorrect arguments to bytevector-copy! --- module/ice-9/suspendable-ports.scm | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/module/ice-9/suspendable-ports.scm b/module/ice-9/suspendable-ports.scm index f5f00

[PATCH 1/2] Add tests for get-bytevector-some!

* test-suite/tests/r6rs-ports.test (get-bytevector-n! [short]): add (get-bytevector-n! [long]): add --- test-suite/tests/r6rs-ports.test | 20 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+) diff --git a/test-suite/tests/r6rs-ports.test b/test-suite/tests/r6rs-ports.test index 4d1981df2..

Re: [PATCH] add SRFI: srfi-121; generators

Hi John, John Cowan writes: > Mark: I'm interested to know if you have a sketch of ideas for a more > efficient implementation of SRFI 121/158. You say it requires specific > knowledge of Guile internals, but are you willing to sketch how you might > do it? Thanks. Here are a few suggestions

Re: [PATCH] add SRFI: srfi-121; generators

Hi Arthur, "Arthur A. Gleckler" writes: > It's not a bad idea for the sample implementation to be as clear as > possible at the expense of performance. I agree that it's desirable for one of the sample implementations to be as simple and clear as possible, for the purpose of clarifying the speci