On 2 September 2017 at 06:45, Stefan Israelsson Tampe
wrote:
> form is either specified or current-language and what I propose is to add a
> knob that enables another version of the default for from e.g. something
> like the following.
>
> (define %extension-map '((("py" "python") python) ((("pl"
On 8 September 2017 at 11:39, William ML Leslie
wrote:
> https://docs.python.org/3/library/importlib.html#module-importlib
>
Hmm I could have said something similar about Java's classloaders or
OSGi or E's eMakers (eMakers are even better, though require more work
to feel guile
On 9 September 2017 at 08:25, Stefan Israelsson Tampe
wrote:
> def gen(l):
> def f(x):
> yield(gen) x
>
Whoa. You're yielding from a different frame?!
--
William Leslie
Notice:
Likely much of this email is, by the nature of copyright, covered
under copyright law. You absolutely M
On 14 July 2018 at 12:53, Matt Wette wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I posed a question on #guile IRC last weekend asking for use cases for
> making Guile
> multi-lingual. The use case that came up was the desire to use Guile as an
> extension
> that supports multiple languages for users. To that end, I wo
On 14 July 2018 at 12:57, Brett Gilio wrote:
> Is this possibility for making Guile multi-lingual a promised feature,
> or more of a wishlist type thing? I'll have to think about some ways
> that might be good to approach this, because the limiting
> volunteer-community is definitely going to be a
On Sun, 26 Jan 2020, 8:20 am John Paul Adrian Glaubitz, <
glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
> Hi Andy!
>
> I noticed that you recently purged hppa support from guile [1].
>
This change does not remove hppa support from guile, only support for the
jit.
As an ia64 user, i'm a bit sad that we lo
On Sun, 26 Jan 2020, 4:46 pm William ML Leslie, <
william.leslie@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jan 2020, 8:20 am John Paul Adrian Glaubitz, <
> glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>
>> Hi Andy!
>>
>> I noticed that you recently purged hppa support from
On Sun, 26 Jan 2020 at 20:51, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> On 1/26/20 6:46 AM, William ML Leslie wrote:
> > On Sun, 26 Jan 2020, 8:20 am John Paul Adrian Glaubitz,
> > mailto:glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Andy!
>
On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 at 02:59, Stefan Israelsson Tampe
wrote:
>
> I have this (on guile 3.0.0),
>
> (define (f x) (call-with-values (lambda () x) (case-lambda ((x) ...) (x
> ...)
>
> and the code does not simplify to (define (f x) x), why?
>
> It would be great to have guile optimize this as i
On Tue, 28 Apr 2020, 8:28 pm Arne Babenhauserheide, wrote:
> Hi Dale,
>
> I would like to see an easier way to parse arguments, but I did not yet
> find
> something that’s on-par with the argparse module in Python.
>
> Best wishes,
> Arne
>
The Python world seem mostly enamoured with click.
htt
You could do it the same way python does it: have `def` be a macro that
inspects its body for assignments to symbols, and then let-bind them at the
top of the function.
On Wed, 22 Sep 2021, 6:45 pm Damien Mattei, wrote:
> Hi Taylan,
>
> i have used Module System Reflection, and it works almost f
On Thu, 23 Sep 2021, 4:51 am Taylan Kammer, wrote:
> On 22.09.2021 11:53, Damien Mattei wrote:
> > i already do it this way for internal defines ,using a recursive macro
> that build a list of variable using an accumulator. It can works but macro
> expansion seems slow, it was not immediate at co
On Fri, 22 Apr 2022, 7:46 am Stefan Israelsson Tampe, <
stefan.ita...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is a nice idea for to hash tables for 0-256 elements (perhaps even
> 512)
>
> http://itampe.com/category/computers.html
>
Hi Stis,
This is a very cool layout, especially getting to take advantage of SI
On 12 July 2012 13:12, nalaginrut wrote:
>> Personally I would think that having Guile guess by extension would be
>> the, in most cases, most reliable. Otherwise there could be problems
>> loading several files in different languages etc.
>>
> Yes, my vote is gussing by extension. But also provid
On 9 September 2012 13:41, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> Another option is to use the method described in "Efficient Nondestructive
> Equality Checking for Trees and Graphs" by Adams and Dybvig.
>
> http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~dyb/pubs/equal.pdf
>
> Mark
The 'interleave' algorithm there looks excelle
On 13 February 2013 05:24, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> Okay, but here I'm using "Static FFI" to mean something very different
> than the C API: I'm talking about a pure scheme-based API that would be
> quite similar to the API our current dynamic FFI, except that a lot of
> the work would be done at co
On 20 February 2013 03:21, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> (define (func x)
> (let ((r (my-special-function x)))
> (+ x 2 r)))
>
> Here, (my-special-function x) must be evaluated before evaluating '+'.
> Evaluating '+' means to fetch the value stored in the location denoted
> by '+'. Therefore, if '
On 23 February 2013 18:49, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> William ML Leslie writes:
>> Recompiling every procedure that uses + when somebody binds it means
>> compiling a lot of code that probably isn't going to be used. More
>> likely, if + has been inlined here, the co
On 30 April 2013 06:15, Stefan Israelsson Tampe wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> As I told you in an earlier mail I'm back cleaning up and reworking
> guile-log and
> refreshing the memory of the inner details of that code base enabled me to
> rewrite
> the spec for redo safe variables considerable. I think t
On 18 June 2013 06:14, Andy Wingo wrote:
> If I understand correctly, I think this is going in the wrong
> abstractive direction -- CPS is nice because it's a limpid medium for
> program transformations that also corresponds neatly to runtime. With
> this sort of thing we'd be moving farther away
On 12 July 2013 17:14, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Reading the documentation of take!
>
> -- Scheme Procedure: take lst i
> -- Scheme Procedure: take! lst i
> Return a list containing the first I elements of LST.
>
> `take!' may modify the structure of the argument l
On 12 July 2013 17:14, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Reading the documentation of take!
>
> -- Scheme Procedure: take lst i
> -- Scheme Procedure: take! lst i
> Return a list containing the first I elements of LST.
>
> `take!' may modify the structure of the argument l
On 15 August 2013 08:33, Alexandru Cojocaru wrote:
> Hi,
> currently `string-set!' returns an unspecified value. What about making it
> return `str' instead?
Functions whose specific purpose is to mutate the provided value
usually don't return the value because that is a common source of bugs
- t
On 1 November 2013 08:52, Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer")
wrote:
> I have a set of proposals for making Guile Scheme more optimizable.
> My knowledge of Guile internals is lacking, but I hope these ideas
> will be useful from a high-level perspective, at the very least to
> ignite some thoughts.
>
On 4 September 2014 11:57, Ian Grant wrote:
> Now it may seem unlikely to some that this has been done. But it is surely
> obvious to *everyone* that this is *possible,* and since the advantage an
> attacker accrues if he can pull this off effectively is incalculable, it
> should also be obvious t
On 5 September 2014 03:33, Ian Grant wrote:
> This is only the tip of the ice-burg; and the less evidence I see that
> people are properly addressing this 'issue', the more of these
> 'suggestions' I will publish over the next few days.
I would be much more interested in hearing about how you int
On 6 September 2014 11:40, Ian Grant wrote:
> The problem is this: it is impossible to bootstrap the GNU tool-chain from
> scratch because it's all written in C, and C is too complex a language to
> use for a definitional interpreter. So we always rely on the semantics
> determined by some C compi
On 7 September 2014 01:49, Ian Grant wrote:
> You are just not at all convincing, I'm afraid. Tell your boss they didn't
> train you properly, and can you get assigned somewhere else.
>
Unfortunately, this is a reality we have to deal with when discussing
security on the internet: we've got to
On 20 September 2014 18:50, Panicz Maciej Godek
wrote:
>
>
> And I still find it difficult to see anything terrible in the idea that
> "FSF had been subverted", when I interpret that in terms of software
> security, because the way I see it, the main premise of FSF movement is to
> share the c
I wasn't really sure if I should reply to this thread again, but I guess I
should clear up some of my thoughts and experiences here.
On 20 September 2014 22:46, Taylan Ulrich Bayirli/Kammer <
taylanbayi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Panicz Maciej Godek writes:
> > [...] the back doors can be implemente
On 3 October 2014 16:23, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> Instead, he insists to distribute them in an opaque
> format that can only be interpreted by a small handful of very complex
> programs with a large attack surface.
>
Oh, interesting point. Maybe we should define PDF as an abstract
semantics that
On 3 October 2014 22:56, Taylan Ulrich Bayirli/Kammer <
taylanbayi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> William ML Leslie writes:
>
> > Oh, interesting point. Maybe we should define PDF as an abstract
> > semantics that we can convert into a wide range of equivalent document
>
On 6 October 2014 11:30, Ian Grant wrote:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2014-10/msg00016.html
>
> From: William ML Leslie
> Date:Mon, 6 Oct 2014 00:57:49 +1100
> On 3 October 2014 22:56, Taylan Ulrich Bayirli/Kammer
> wrote:
>
> > Say, for ex
On 5 November 2015 at 20:58, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> GDB! What would the associated picture be?
A brass clockwork cockroach!
--
William Leslie
Notice:
Likely much of this email is, by the nature of copyright, covered
under copyright law. You absolutely MAY reproduce any part of it in
accord
On 6 December 2015 at 01:58, Christopher Allan Webber
wrote:
> Amirouche Boubekki writes:
>> 8sync has two types of async-request:
>>
>> ** run-requests, which implements kind of a *coroutine* behavior.
>>
>> It pause the execution of the current procedure and schedule
>> the provided lambda to be
On 20 June 2016 at 06:09, Chris Vine wrote:
> OK I am grateful for your patience in explaining this. I need to think
> about it, but while this works where all events come from user-derived
> events, I doubt that this would work with guile-gnome and the glib main
> loop in the round, because for
On 23 June 2016 at 20:43, Andy Wingo wrote:
> On Thu 23 Jun 2016 11:24, Chris Vine writes:
>> Secondly, as I understand it in the end you want pre-emptive "green"
>> threads for guile, whereas my code equates to co-operative
>> multi-tasking, whilst also working with native threads. I must come
On 14 April 2011 01:23, Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote:
> In general, there may be a need for a very good lisp virtual machine to
> run and integrate lisp code in general (CL, various schemes, and other
> sorts of lisp-like languages, we could include perhaps implementations
> of python, ruby, smal
On 23 April 2011 14:24, nalaginrut wrote:
> I think this simple solution could be a temporary substitute before a
> AOT guile-compiler come out. To myself, I really want to use a AOT
> compiler to do such a job(it's better for optimizing the code).
Just to clear up a seemingly common misconceptio
On 26 September 2011 19:11, Marijn wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi Noah,
>
> On 09/26/11 00:33, Noah Lavine wrote:
>> I thought of another use-case, and I wonder if you think this is
>> on-topic or not:
>>
>> - You write a parallel version of map that is fast, but o
On 13 February 2012 10:57, Alex Shinn wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Alex Shinn skribis:
>>> There is no "gnu" feature proposed in R7RS,
>>
>> That would be for GNU, aka. GNU/Hurd.
>
> Wouldn't the feature be better named "hurd" then?
>
> How can a system be
41 matches
Mail list logo
