[Chicken-hackers] scrutinizer patches

[Felix]

Hi!

Could someone please review my scrutinizer patches? They
are quite critical to make the type-analysis (more) correct.


cheers,
felix

___
Chicken-hackers mailing list
Chicken-hackers@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers

[Chicken-hackers] Remove old variant of find-files

[Christian Kellermann]

Hi,

this is a simple patch to remove the deprecated variant of find-files.
As it is now the old variant is always choosen when calling find-files
with just 1 argument.

There is one discrepancy left as we do follow symlinks by default
and the docs say the opposite. Which way is the better behaviour?
I will change either the default or the docs then.

Cheers,

Christian

-- 
Who can (make) the muddy water (clear)? Let it be still, and it will
gradually become clear. Who can secure the condition of rest? Let
movement go on, and the condition of rest will gradually arise.
 -- Lao Tse. 
From a03d5bdaebe91f35a5e71ca19aecc2feae958451 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Christian Kellermann ck...@pestilenz.org
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 09:57:26 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Remove deprecated find-files variant. Deprecated since 4.6.0.

---
 posix-common.scm |   25 +++--
 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)

diff --git a/posix-common.scm b/posix-common.scm
index 4b4e217..827e8a9 100644
--- a/posix-common.scm
+++ b/posix-common.scm
@@ -417,24 +417,13 @@ EOF
((pproc f) (loop rest (action f r)))
(else (loop rest r)) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
 
-(define (find-files dir . args)
-  (cond ((or (null? args) (not (keyword? (car args
-;; old signature - DEPRECATED
-(let-optionals args ((pred (lambda _ #t))
- (action (lambda (x y) (cons x y))) ; we want 
`cons' inlined
- (id '())
- (limit #f) )
-  (##sys#find-files dir pred action id limit #t #f 'find-files)))
-   (else
-(apply 
- (lambda (#!key (test (lambda _ #t))
-(action (lambda (x y) (cons x y))) ; s.a.
-(seed '())
-(limit #f)
-(dotfiles #f)
-(follow-symlinks #t))
-   (##sys#find-files dir test action seed limit follow-symlinks 
dotfiles 'find-files))
- args
+(define (find-files dir #!key (test (lambda _ #t))
+ (action (lambda (x y) (cons x y)))
+  (seed '())
+  (limit #f)
+  (dotfiles #f)
+  (follow-symlinks #t))
+  (##sys#find-files dir test action seed limit follow-symlinks dotfiles 
'find-files))
 
 
 ;;; umask
-- 
1.7.2.5

___
Chicken-hackers mailing list
Chicken-hackers@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers

Re: [Chicken-hackers] Remove old variant of find-files

[Moritz Heidkamp]

Christian Kellermann ck...@pestilenz.org writes:
 this is a simple patch to remove the deprecated variant of find-files.
 As it is now the old variant is always choosen when calling find-files
 with just 1 argument.

Looks good to me! I don't really get that we want `cons' inlined
comment in the original version. Why doesn't direct passing of cons lead
to inlining?


 There is one discrepancy left as we do follow symlinks by default
 and the docs say the opposite. Which way is the better behaviour?
 I will change either the default or the docs then.

I'm not entirely sure what would be a sensible default myself. FWIW the
GNU find program doesn't follow symlinks by default.


Moritz

___
Chicken-hackers mailing list
Chicken-hackers@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers