> The GNU licenses define "source code" as "the preferred form of the work
> for making modifications to it". I think it is quite important for our
> future liberty that we hold to this definition and not accept a weaker
> one.
You are absolutely right in that regard
and should we be completely
jerem...@pdp10.guru writes:
> Well looking at the contents of psyntax-pp.scm
> (https://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=guile.git;a=blob;f=module/ice-9/psyntax-pp.scm;h=e2ebeced117d4c43ca2eb3ca3a1b659f3fb62d9a;hb=HEAD)
> I would argue it counts as source code as it is in a form that is human
> read
Alex Vong writes:
> Mark H Weaver writes:
>
>> At this point, I believe it would be quite feasible for a single hacker
>> to audit our psyntax-pp.scm and compare it to psyntax.scm within a
>> reasonable time frame. Furthermore, when we make local changes to
>> psyntax.scm, the corresponding cha
Mark H Weaver writes:
>> Does this mean Guile is not bootstrappable from source only?
>
> That's correct. psyntax-pp.scm is not source code, and it is needed to
> bootstrap Guile.
I'm facing the same problem with Mes. I have an implemenation of
syntax-rules that is just about 200 lines of defin
Hi Mark,
Mark H Weaver writes:
> Hi Alex,
>
> Alex Vong writes:
>
>> Recently, I've read the chapter on Macros in Guile's manual. The manual
>> says that Guile's expander originated from that of Chez Scheme's and
>> that version was portable to other schemes as well. So I search the
>> Internet
Well looking at the contents of psyntax-pp.scm
(https://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=guile.git;a=blob;f=module/ice-9/psyntax-pp.scm;h=e2ebeced117d4c43ca2eb3ca3a1b659f3fb62d9a;hb=HEAD)
I would argue it counts as source code as it is in a form that is human
readable and modifiable.
But I am glad t
