On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 19:50 -0600, Jon Wilson wrote:
> Yeah, I guess you're right. Like I said, I'm new to the whole idea of
> macros, and I'm kind of looking for a really good use-case for the
> things. Can you suggest a non-contrived situation in which a macro
> would be the best solution?
WA
Hi Kevin,
I'll change the section to something like below. Both shorter and
clearer I think.
Looks excellent to me!
Regards,
Jon
___
Guile-user mailing list
Guile-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user
Jon Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> which seems to suggest (incorrectly, obviously) that the arguments to
> both assoc and assoc-ref should be the same. Perhaps, given that it
> seems that a fairly large number of people have misread the manual and
> gotten confused about this, it would be
Hi Ludovic,
This is clearly not possible because `assq' et al. are part of R5RS and
`assoc-ref' has been part of Guile for a very, very long time.
Fair enough.
One just has to be very careful when reading the manual. ;-)
The manual says
"Like assq, assv and assoc, except that only the va
Hi,
Jon Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Or, perhaps in some future version, the argument order for assoc and
> friends should be changed to match assoc-ref et al.
This is clearly not possible because `assq' et al. are part of R5RS and
`assoc-ref' has been part of Guile for a very, very lon
Hi Tomas,
> Heh. The arguments are backwards. You want (assoc-ref forms '+)
>
> Yeah, that has bitten others before you.
>
> Consider vector-ref string-ref, list-ref, which take the vector,
> string, list as first argument.
>
> Regards
> -- tomas
Thanks for pointing that out!
Hmmm, perhaps a sp
