Re: Installing scheme only programs

2011-03-10 Thread nalaginrut
> >> > I wonder if there is a tool to, say, strip all comments from the > >> > "binary", so it could be smaller. I guess such tool would not be that > >> > hard to write, but I don't know. > >> > >> I think it's not a big deal if you just want to get rid of comments.I > >> always do it like this w

Re: Installing scheme only programs

2011-03-10 Thread Diogo F . S . Ramos
>> > I wonder if there is a tool to, say, strip all comments from the >> > "binary", so it could be smaller. I guess such tool would not be that >> > hard to write, but I don't know. >> >> I think it's not a big deal if you just want to get rid of comments.I >> always do it like this way: >> =

Re: Installing scheme only programs

2011-03-10 Thread dsmich
nalaginrut wrote: > > I wonder if there is a tool to, say, strip all comments from the > > "binary", so it could be smaller. I guess such tool would not be that > > hard to write, but I don't know. > > I think it's not a big deal if you just want to get rid of comments.I > always do it lik

Re: Parsing a struct within a struct

2011-03-10 Thread Aidan Gauland
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:36:43PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > This patch should fix it (will be in 2.0.1): It did! Fantastic! Thank you very much! :D > PS: Let us know when your game is ready. :-) Definitely. --Aidan signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: Installing scheme only programs

2011-03-10 Thread nalaginrut
> I wonder if there is a tool to, say, strip all comments from the > "binary", so it could be smaller. I guess such tool would not be that > hard to write, but I don't know. I think it's not a big deal if you just want to get rid of comments.I always do it like this way: == sed "/;.*/d" filena

Re: Parsing a struct within a struct

2011-03-10 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi Aidan, Aidan Gauland writes: > On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 08:20:29PM +1300, Aidan Gauland wrote: >> (parse-c-struct event-pointer >> (list uint8 uint8 uint8 >> (list uint8 int int uint16 ))) >> > > It seemed to be an off-by-one(-byte) error. There was paddi

Re: Problems to install Guile 2.0.0

2011-03-10 Thread Mark H Weaver
One possibility is that the hand-entered compile command actually worked for some reason. It certainly appears to have worked. Perhaps the added debugging switches, or perhaps something missing from the environment that libtool or make provides, made it work. Germán's later efforts to compile ma

Re: Problems to install Guile 2.0.0

2011-03-10 Thread Germán Arias
I send you attached an image about how I see this character on Gedit and Emacs. On jue, 2011-03-10 at 10:41 -0800, Mike Gran wrote: > >> OK, I solved the problem. Checking the files vm.c, vm.s,... . I found > >> the character > >> > >> > >> > >> at file vm.c. > > > >there's a strange characte

Re: Problems to install Guile 2.0.0

2011-03-10 Thread Mike Gran
>> OK, I solved the problem. Checking the files vm.c, vm.s,... . I found >> the character >> >> >> >> at file vm.c. > >there's a strange character between the ctrl-L and the "at file". >I thought that was what he was having problems with. > >od -x > >120 7463 7265 0a0a 0a0c ef0a bfbb 7461 6

Re: Problems to install Guile 2.0.0

2011-03-10 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi, Keith Wright writes: >> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Germ=E1n?= Arias >> Cc: Mark H Weaver , >> Ludovic =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= , guile-user@gnu.org >> >> OK, I solved the problem. Checking the files vm.c, vm.s,... . I found >> the character >> >> >> >> at file vm.c. > > there's a stran

Re: Problems to install Guile 2.0.0

2011-03-10 Thread Keith Wright
> From: l...@gnu.org (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=) > > If the ^L character was a problem, then you’d have troubles compiling > GNU programs. :-) > > So I suspect there was another problem. Was the ctrl-L what he said is the problem? I don't know what email reader you are using, but I sa

Re: Installing scheme only programs

2011-03-10 Thread Diogo F . S . Ramos
>I recently learn a technique where, during 'make', one 'cat' all the >sources files together, forming a big, single executable script. Doing >so, there is no need to install the .scm files, because they are all >inside the same executable file. > > This is the technique used in RP

Re: Installing scheme only programs

2011-03-10 Thread Diogo F . S . Ramos
> I use the following trick to get things into the guile site directory > (and still pass a make distcheck). > > In configure.ac > GUILE_PROGS > GUILE_FLAGS > GUILE_SITE_DIR > > GUILE_PREFIX=`$GUILE_CONFIG info prefix` > AC_SUBST(GUILE_PREFIX) > > In src/Makefile.am: > SUFFIXES = .scm .go > .scm

Re: Problems to install Guile 2.0.0

2011-03-10 Thread rixed
Maybe touching these file triggered a required rebuild. So the bug would be a missing dependency in the makefiles?

Re: Problems to install Guile 2.0.0

2011-03-10 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi Germán, If the ^L character was a problem, then you’d have troubles compiling GNU programs. :-) So I suspect there was another problem. Thanks, Ludo’.

Re: Installing scheme only programs

2011-03-10 Thread Thien-Thi Nguyen
() Diogo F. S. Ramos () Thu, 10 Mar 2011 03:50:29 -0300 (BRT) I recently learn a technique where, during 'make', one 'cat' all the sources files together, forming a big, single executable script. Doing so, there is no need to install the .scm files, because they are all inside the sam

Re: Installing scheme only programs

2011-03-10 Thread Tristan Colgate-McFarlane
I use the following trick to get things into the guile site directory (and still pass a make distcheck). In configure.ac GUILE_PROGS GUILE_FLAGS GUILE_SITE_DIR GUILE_PREFIX=`$GUILE_CONFIG info prefix` AC_SUBST(GUILE_PREFIX) In src/Makefile.am: SUFFIXES = .scm .go .scm.go: $(top_srcdir)/b