Hi,
I recently test a piece of code written using call/cc on Guile and several
other Scheme implementations, but get different results. The code piece is
as follows:
(let ((n 0)
(c (call/cc (lambda (k) k
(display n)
(newline)
(set! n (+ n 1))
(c c))
What I wanna do is try to p
On Fri, Dec 25, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Klaus Schilling wrote:
>
> As a function, gor needs to have its arguments evaluated before the
> actual application takes place, moreover, the order of evaluation is
> not specified.
>
> Hence
>
> (define x 0)
> (gor (= x 0) (/ x))
>
> gives a numerical overflow er
Hi,
I don't see the point why Scheme provides the general `and' and `or' as
primitive macros (which does stand in our way when we wanna (apply and
things) instead of primitive procedures. For efficiency? I don't think there
would be much compared to the following definitions:
(define (gand . l)
Neil,
Thanks for your reply. It helps a lot, especially the explanation of the
structure of the tree. I will try. And other suggestions are also welcome.
best regards,
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 7:02 PM, Neil Jerram wrote:
> Yi DAI writes:
>
> > Hi,
>
> Hi there!
>
Hi,
I've been using Guile for a while. And now I wanna learn things under the
hook and wish someday I could contribute some code to the base also. I
haven't finished reading the manual yet. I think it would be a good
combination to read the manual and at the same time read some implementation
cod
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 2:44 AM, parawaiter wrote:
> 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 ?)
>
Y
Hi, all, I read the following in "5.1 Overview of the Guile API" of the
reference manual.
- Replace <= (less than or equal) with _leq.
- Replace >= (greater than or equal) with _geq.
- Replace < (less than) with _less.
- Replace > (greater than) with _gr.
I'd like to suggest the follo
