Re: scm_shell in C-Thread - Quit vs. Terminal Corruption

2009-10-18 Thread kai . selgrad
Hej Neil. On 16:05 Sun 18 Oct , Neil Jerram wrote: > Calling scm_shell() with no args means just that that thread will run > `(top-repl)' - whose definition you can see in boot-9.scm. In other > words you could say that the default args are like `-c (top-repl)'. > > `(quit)' means (throw 'qu

Re: scm_shell in C-Thread - Quit vs. Terminal Corruption

2009-10-18 Thread Neil Jerram
kai.selg...@web.de writes: > Hej linas, > > thanks for your reply. > >> > application and guile). When I enter >> >        (quit) >> > in the terminal scm_shell calls exit(), which does not care much for my >> > application cleanup. >> wouldn't atexit() solve this problem? > Yes, you're right. ate

Re: Interesting Behavior of 'append!' In Local Context

2009-10-18 Thread Eric McDonald
Stephen Compall wrote: > ;; and "your code" > (clcase (+ 21 21) > ((42) 'its-42) > ((84) 'its-84)) [snip] >> Fair enough. I certainly wouldn't mind seeing "detect and inform" >> implemented for this case. As a comparison: if I'm writing C or C++ >> code, and I try to modify a

Re: Interesting Behavior of 'append!' In Local Context

2009-10-18 Thread Andy Wingo
Hello Eric, On Sun 18 Oct 2009 02:36, Eric McDonald writes: > Stephen Compall wrote: > >> It is an error to modify literals, but it is also not required by R5RS >> to detect and inform of such erroneous modification. It is, however, > > Fair enough. I certainly wouldn't mind seeing "detect and