On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 1:26 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> My understanding is that these mailing lists require a Google account,
> which I’m personally not interested in.
>
> In the past, I subscribed these lists to Gmane [0], but unfortunately,
> that doesn’t allow for posting.
>
> Wo
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 1:18 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Thanks! There are a few typos:
>
> guile -> Guile
> racket -> Racket
> an hygienic -> a hygienic
This is somewhat debatable:
http://www.grammarunderground.com/an-historic-vs-a-historic.html
Google finds about 7:1 pages usin
On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 2:00 AM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe
wrote:
> You are right! That will only work for one thread!
>
> Remain to see how much the overhed there is to linearize the search and
> use tourtoues - hare, should be much less overhead then using a map to
> mark the objects though!
See h
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 5:41 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Mark H Weaver skribis:
>
>> Unfortunately, preserving the macro keyword breaks one of Oleg
>> Kiselyov's macros, namely 'ppat' in system/base/pmatch.scm:
>
> [...]
>
>> Oleg's macro uses '_' in the keyword position of the pattern,
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 5:28 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Mark H Weaver skribis:
>
>> One option would be to return to Aubrey Jaffer's model (used in SCM),
>> where a catalog of modules and their locations is maintained
>
> Hmm, I never really liked that. And it’s quite an uncommon model.
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 11:36 PM, Andy Wingo wrote:
> Quiz: what does this do?
>
> (define (f s)
> (with-output-to-string (lambda () (display s
>
> When called with a string, what should it do? Like (f "foo").
>
> If you answered, "return the string", that's what I would think it
> sho
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 8:24 AM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe <
stefan.ita...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I managed to do what you said, the result is at
>
> https://gitorious.org/syntax-closures
>
> I changed it so that it is enough to do
>
> (use-modules (srfi srfi-72))
>
Note SRFI-72 is not an impl
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe <
stefan.ita...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 2. I was actually hesistant to call this srfi-72 because of trying to
> do what it want
>more than what it say's. A main trick to simulate the effect was to
> introduce
>a closure in the syntax a
of 6 to 12 pages.
Presentation submissions should include an outline of the material.
Talks are 40 minutes, including questions and answers.
More information available at: http://scheme2016.snow-fort.org/
Organizers:
Alex Shin
w-fort.org/
Organizers:
Alex Shinn (general chair)
Kathy Gray (program chair)
(Apologies for duplications from cross-posting.)
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
On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 9:12 PM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
> Well, since there are only 9 of them, they could probably be implemented
> as special cases, with an augmented ‘match-gen-ellipses’, which would be
> told the minimum number of elements expected?
Oh, the Wright syntax limited you to 9 for
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 6:15 AM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe
wrote:
>
> I just wanted to share some ideas that come to my mind to churn the prolog
> into something more useful.
Have you played with schelog and kanren?
> So I have been trying to rework Shins hygienic version if ice-9 match so that
>
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:56 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
> There was a bug in the patch at [0], whereby ‘..1’ would be considered
> as the name of a pattern variable:
Oh, I had already fixed that upstream (on synthcode.com),
sorry I forgot to mention it!
--
Alex
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:27 PM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
> Is there a public version control repository at synthcode.com?
Not for match.scm, but that's just a copy of the chibi-scheme
version with record patterns commented out:
hg clone https://chibi-scheme.googlecode.com/hg/ chibi-scheme
--
2011/3/7 Ludovic Courtès :
> Hi Andreas,
>
> Andreas Rottmann writes:
>
>> The expansion of `define-inlinable' contained an expression, which made
>> SRFI-9's `define-record-type' fail in non-toplevel contexts ("definition
>> used in expression context").
>
> SRFI-9 says “Record-type definitions m
On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>> I also think strings should remain what they currently are, with O(1)
>> random access.
>
> I just realized that it is possible to implement O(1) accessors for
> UTF-8 backed strings.
It's possible w
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 12:46 AM, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> Alex Shinn wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Mark H Weaver wrote:
>>> I just realized that it is possible to implement O(1) accessors for
>>> UTF-8 backed strings.
>>
>> It's possible
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 5:39 AM, Mike Gran wrote:
>> From:Mark H Weaver
>>
>> Mike Gran writes:
>> > We do, in a matter of speaking, have a single string representation:
>> > UTF-32. The 'narrow' encoding is UTF-32 with the initial 3 bytes
>> of
>> > zero removed.
>>
>> Despite the similarity o
time are available in
the (scheme time) module.
* A complete set of integer division operators is available in
the (scheme division) module.
* Transcript-on and transcript-off have been removed.
Thank you.
--
Alex Shinn, WG1 Chair
On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Noah Lavine wrote:
>> Most importantly, we have added modules, allowing programmers to
>> share portable libraries with ease. We hope implementors
>> consider the effort of supporting the new standard small compared
>> to that important benefit. Keep in mind tha
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Marijn wrote:
>
> Couldn't help but wonder why they don't return the value of the last
> body form, so I looked around a bit and both CLHS[1] and my racket
> REPL seem to agree that they should:
>
> $ racket
> Welcome to Racket v5.2.0.4.
>> (when #t 'hello)
> 'hello
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Mark H Weaver wrote:
>
> I'd like to argue in favor of supporting (begin), (cond), (case-lambda)
> and other such degenerate forms, for the same reason that we support
> (*), (+), and (let () ...).
>
> First of all: Is there any compelling reason not to support them
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> Alex Shinn writes:
>
>> On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Mark H Weaver wrote:
>>>
>>> I'd like to argue in favor of supporting (begin), (cond), (case-lambda)
>>> and other such degenerat
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Mark H Weaver wrote:
>
> For example, consider a convenience macro to define a structure type.
> It expands to a sequence of definitions, one of which is the
> constructor. In the structure specification, each field may provide an
> optional `valid?' predicate. On
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 9:26 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
> Alex Shinn writes:
>>
>> This analogy is meaningless, but for the record
>> you should be using fold or reduce here.
>
> I don't think it is the task of a language to enforce arbitrary
> aesthetic criteri
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 9:50 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
> Alex Shinn writes:
>
>> On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 9:26 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
>>> Alex Shinn writes:
>>>>
>>>> This analogy is meaningless, but for the record
>>>> you should be u
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 12:53 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
>> * R7RS feature identifiers: r7rs, exact-closed, ratios, exact-complex,
>> ieee-float, full-unicode, windows, posix, unix, darwin, linux, bsd,
>> freebsd, solaris, i386, x86-64, ppc, sparc, jvm, clr, llvm, ilp32,
>> lp64, ilp64, bi
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> Thanks for your feedback.
>
> Alex Shinn skribis:
>
>> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 12:53 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>>>
>>>> * R7RS feature identifiers: r7rs, exact-closed, ratios, e
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Alex Shinn skribis:
>> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>>> Alex Shinn skribis:
>>>
>>>> There is no "gnu" feature proposed in R7RS,
>>>
>>>
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 7:06 AM, Andy Wingo wrote:
>
>> * datum labels for circular and shared substructures
>
> Yes!
Note this is one thing a reference implementation will
be provided for.
>> * nan? and finite? now accept complex numbers
>> (should probably change inf? and infinite? as well)
2012/2/26 Ludovic Courtès :
> Hi,
>
> Alex Shinn skribis:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 7:06 AM, Andy Wingo wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>>> * R7RS exceptions
>>>
>>> Are they like R6RS exceptions?
>>
>> Yes, just the exceptions with no
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 11:10 PM, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> Alex Shinn writes:
>> On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Mark H Weaver wrote:
>>> Well, how about mandating support for these degenerate forms in R7RS? :)
>>> I'm quite serious. I would argue the point on
On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 12:36 PM, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> Alex Shinn writes:
>> The moderator is mostly inactive. Is subscribing
>> really such a problem for people?
>
> If subscribers can post without moderation,
> then I will be glad to subscribe.
Yes, of course they c
Now not only can you write portable code, you can share it easily with
your friends!
http://synthcode.com/scheme/common-scheme/
Version 0.3 adds the optional "common-scheme" command which acts as a
package management system and multi-platform build tool all in one.
Search and install from a dec
[Please send followups to the common-scheme mailing list.]
Note: version 0.3.1 is available with several bugfixes.
On 9/10/05, Neil Jerram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alex Shinn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > http://synthcode.com/scheme/common-scheme/
>
> Th
36 matches
Mail list logo
