g systems without breaking half of the system I'm convinced that
it would be way more productive to port Lilypond to S7 Scheme
(https://ccrma.stanford.edu/software/snd/snd/s7.html) whose C interface,
IIRC is pretty much Guile-compatible (renaming scm_ to s7_).
Juat 0.02$ from a former guile us
ns as generic, but from what I see Guile2
automatically generates the appropriate generic functions. This is
pretty much how Common Lisp handles defmethod without a matching
defgeneric (but in CL you aren't allowed to transform a function from CL
into a generic).
Cheers, Ralf Mattes
> Best wis
e your package manager will happily
erase your custom guile and install the distribution version.
Binaries installed into /usr/local (the default chosen by autoconf) will
be the first binary found in the path in all distibutions I have seen
so far.
Cheers, Ralf Mattes
> Regards,
>
> Amirouche ~ amz3
>
;m to
lazy to google it up ...).
> or natively porting
> something like Whoosh, for Guile.
I've seen similar approaches for Common Lisp (search for montezuma) but in the
end it seems to be way too much work - remember that not a small part of
Lucene's
success is based on the exi
One other thing,
your script (ao-guile) starts with a hash-bang "/usr/bin/env guile".
At least on Debian that might not work since guile might well be a link
to guile-1.8
Maybe you need to make the guile binary a configuration option?
Cheers, RalfD
$ GUILE_AUTO_COMPILE=1 bin/ao-guile
...
;;; compiling /usr/local/src/LISP/ao/bin/../bind/guile/ao/shapes.scm
guile-2.0: Couldn't find current GLX or EGL context.
HTH RalfD
> -Matt
>
> On Aug 20, 2016, at 9:23 AM, Ralf Mattes wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 0
snan(a.lower()) || isnan(a.upper())) ? b : a;
^
This is with:
/usr/bin/c++ --version
g++-5.real (Debian 5.4.0-6) 5.4.0 20160609
and /usr/include/c++/5/cmath from the package libstdc++-5-dev:amd64
on a Debian Testing system.
But it looks very nice
Cheers, Ralf Mattes
> -Matt
On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 10:18:19PM +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote:
> um...@openmailbox.org writes:
>
> > Hello list, I need some help.
> >
> > I'm following a Computer Science course material in Python and then
> > try to implement the examples and exercises in Guile Scheme.
> >
> > Currently I'm w
n libguile/srfi-1.c it seems the implementation
builds up a list of results and needs to scan that list for every new item in
the source list. To be fair, the docstring mentiones:
In the worst case, this is an @math{O(N^2)} algorithm ...
One might be tempted to use some kind of hashing dat
On Thu, Jul 02, 2015 at 02:39:17PM +0200, Michael Tiedtke wrote:
It's really hard to tell whether this is a serious post or you are just
wasting other people's time/bandwith. But anyway:
> I just found a BSD copyright notice in inet_aton for the 1.8 branch.
So? Everyone can relicense code publi
PS
> Perhaps it's better to recreate a clean object model without 3,000 lines of
> C code like GOOPS. But then GOOPS really creates the illusion of an object
> oriented environment with a MOP ...
Why, 3000 lines of C code seems like a rather lean codebase for an objet system.
Just my 0.2 $
Ralf Mattes
callbacks (since they don't expect a
hidden instance as the first parameter). You'd still need to pass down an
instance of your GuileApplication class so it can be handed to scm_boot_guile
as the data parameter. This is asdmittedly only slightly better than your
solution.
HTH Ralf Mattes
the relinking will break this signing the relinked
application
won't run on a non-rooted device ... And since you seem to compile C++ code
relinking
will rely on the compiler's C++ ABI.
HTH Ralf Mattes
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 12:04:34PM -0500, dsm...@roadrunner.com wrote:
>
> Sounds like a job for include:
> http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/manual/html_node/Local-Inclusion.html#index-include
>
Yes, except Lilypond's main branch strill uses guile-1.8 and that doesn't know
'include.
I think
-function)
> ; ==> 3
No - this doesn't solve the OP's question.
Even with your macro, x is still defined in
the toplevel. Try this:
(display (test-function))
(display x) ; visible from the toplevel
(set! x 42)
(display (test-function)) ; Outsch!
Cheers, Ralf Mattes
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 12:17:43PM +0200, Panicz Maciej Godek wrote:
> You're right, but it only works if you want to export only one symbol
> from a lexical scope. If you wanted a few procedures accessing
> a single scope, you'd either need to use the solution with 'set!',
> or -- as Taylan sugges
want would be
> (define foo #f)
> (let ((a 2))
> (set! foo (lambda (x) (+ a x
I'd say this is extremly contorted and non-schemish.
What's wrong with:
(define foo
(let ((a 2))
(lambda (arg) (+ a arg
This is the basic let-over-lambda closure
Cheers, Ralf Mattes
subset, while one syntax
will work the same syntactic consgruct will have different _semantics_.
Cheers, Ralf Mattes
uncaught throw to misc-error: (dynamic-link file: ~S, message: ~S
(libguile-srfi-srfi-1-v-4 file not found) #f)
Cannot exit gracefully when init is in progress; aborting.
Aborted
Any ideas what went wrong?
TIA Ralf Mattes
or: Jim Blandy
> Date: Thu Jul 25 22:56:11 1996 +
>
> That's a long time ago...
This might probably be an attempt to be elisp compatible.
| *** Welcome to IELM *** Type (describe-mode) for help.
| ELISP> (1+ 12)
| 13
| ELISP>
HTH Ralf Mattes
> Thanks,
> Ludo'.
>
>
20 matches
Mail list logo
