"Andrew C. Suttles" writes:
> I know this is going to sound troll-ish, but I really don't mean for it to be.
> I have been an Emacs user for quite some time and I've learned to hack my way
> around ELSIP some. I'd like to make a structured attempt to learn LISP(ish)
> programming and read SICP (
I have written standalone programs in guile, and I think it does ok at
that. goops is very cool, and like CLOS, but more scheme-ish (meaning
there is one namespace rather than a separate variable/function/class
namespace).
pgpZLteBgIttq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
I know this is going to sound troll-ish, but I really don't mean for it to be.
I have been an Emacs user for quite some time and I've learned to hack my way
around ELSIP some. I'd like to make a structured attempt to learn LISP(ish)
programming and read SICP (etc) and so I searched the net and ins
On Dec 17, 2009, at 20:05 , Keith Wright wrote:
> Currently, the variables that Scheme programmers know as
> |<| and |>|, are called in C _less and _gr.
This probably also applies to things like string string_lt() (string_lt_p
?)
> Propose to rename the C variables so that |<| and |>|
> are call
> From: l...@gnu.org (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=)
> Cc: guile-user@gnu.org
> >>
> >> Yi DAI writes:
> >>
> >>> I'd like to suggest the following name convention
> >>> which complies to names commonly found in
> >>> assembly languages.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> - Replace < (less than) with *_lt*
Hi,
Linas Vepstas writes:
> 2009/12/17 Ludovic Courtès :
>> Hi,
>>
>> Yi DAI writes:
>>
>>> I'd like to suggest the following name convention which complies to names
>>> commonly found in assembly languages.
>>>
>>>
>>> - Replace < (less than) with *_lt*.
>>> - Replace > (greater than) wi
2009/12/17 Ludovic Courtès :
> Hi,
>
> Yi DAI writes:
>
>> I'd like to suggest the following name convention which complies to names
>> commonly found in assembly languages.
>>
>>
>> - Replace < (less than) with *_lt*.
>> - Replace > (greater than) with *_gt*.
>
> Changing conventions would
Hi,
Yi DAI writes:
> I'd like to suggest the following name convention which complies to names
> commonly found in assembly languages.
>
>
>- Replace < (less than) with *_lt*.
>- Replace > (greater than) with *_gt*.
Changing conventions would mean changing the API or maintaining functio
