Re: [Chicken-users] Friendlier Chicken for Win32
On 19/12/2007, Alex Sandro Queiroz e Silva [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Based on my previous (program-filename) patch, I have created a chicken dist for win32 that can be dropped anywhere. csc automatically finds the Chicken compiler, includes and libs. This package may make the life of first-time Chicken users easier. It is in [1]. [1] - http://www.ventonegro.org/chicken/ Sounds nice. This still requires a gcc somewhere? -- I appear to be temporarily using gmail's horrible interface. I apologise for any failure in my part in trying to make it do the right thing with post formatting. ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
Re: [Chicken-users] Problems with Chicken 2.732 on Mac OS X
On Dec 26, 2007, at 1:24 AM, Ivan Raikov wrote: Okay, so removing /opt/local/bin from my path, and compiling Chicken 2.732 followed by 2.739 seems to work, thanks. However, now I have problems with unresolved symbols in the numbers and gettext eggs, Numbers first... -- sudo chicken-setup numbers ... downloading numbers.egg from (www.call-with-current-continuation.org eggs 80) . gzip -d -c ../numbers.egg | tar xf - /usr/local/bin/csc -feature compiling-extension -s -O2 -d1 numbers- base.scm -lgmp -D numbers-bootstrap -check-imports -emit-exports numbers.exports -extend easyffi -disable-compiler-macros In file included from numbers-base.c:18: numbers-c.c:4:17: error: gmp.h: No such file or directory -- Woops! Lets try again. I have GMP from MacPorts. -- sudo chicken-setup -csc-option -I/opt/local/include -L/opt/local/lib numbers /usr/local/bin/csc -feature compiling-extension -I/opt/local/ include -L/opt/local/lib -s -O2 -d1 numbers-base.scm -lgmp -D numbers- bootstrap -check-imports -emit-exports numbers.exports -extend easyffi -disable-compiler-macros /usr/local/bin/csc -feature compiling-extension -I/opt/local/ include -L/opt/local/lib -O2 -d1 numbers-base.scm -c -D numbers- bootstrap -unit numbers -o numbers-static.o -extend easyffi -disable- compiler-macros rm -fr /usr/local/lib/chicken/3/numbers-base.so cp -r numbers-base.so /usr/local/lib/chicken/3/numbers-base.so chmod a+r /usr/local/lib/chicken/3/numbers-base.so cp -r numbers.scm /usr/local/lib/chicken/3/numbers.scm chmod a+r /usr/local/lib/chicken/3/numbers.scm cp -r numbers-compiler-macros.scm /usr/local/lib/chicken/3/numbers- compiler-macros.scm chmod a+r /usr/local/lib/chicken/3/numbers-compiler-macros.scm cp -r numbers-static.o /usr/local/lib/chicken/3/numbers-static.o chmod a+r /usr/local/lib/chicken/3/numbers-static.o * Installing documentation files in /usr/local/lib/chicken/3: cp -r numbers.html /usr/local/lib/chicken/3/numbers.html chmod a+r /usr/local/lib/chicken/3/numbers.setup-info -- Now gettext... -- sudo chicken-setup -csc-option -I/opt/local/include -L/opt/local/lib gettext The extension gettext does not exist. Do you want to download it ? (yes/no/abort) [yes] downloading gettext.egg from (www.call-with-current-continuation.org eggs 80) gzip -d -c ../gettext.egg | tar xf - /usr/local/bin/csc -feature compiling-extension -I/opt/local/ include -L/opt/local/lib -s -O2 -d1 gettext.scm Undefined symbols: _libintl_textdomain, referenced from: _f_128 in gettext.o _libintl_bindtextdomain, referenced from: _f_103 in gettext.o _libintl_gettext, referenced from: _f_153 in gettext.o ld: symbol(s) not found collect2: ld returned 1 exit status *** Shell command terminated with exit status 1: gcc gettext.o -o gettext.so -bundle -L/usr/local/lib -L/opt/local/lib -lm -lchicken Error: shell invocation failed with non-zero return status /usr/local/bin/csc -feature compiling-extension -I/opt/local/include - L/opt/lo... 256 -- I do have gettext installed from MacPorts. Also, -- nm /opt/local/lib/libintl.a |grep intl_textdomain T _libintl_textdomain U _libintl_textdomain -- Could it be that -lintl is missing? -- sudo chicken-setup -csc-option -I/opt/local/include -L/opt/local/lib - lintl gettext /usr/local/bin/csc -feature compiling-extension -I/opt/local/ include -L/opt/local/lib -lintl -s -O2 -d1 gettext.scm rm -fr /usr/local/lib/chicken/3/gettext.so cp -r gettext.so /usr/local/lib/chicken/3/gettext.so chmod a+r /usr/local/lib/chicken/3/gettext.so cp -r gettext.html /usr/local/lib/chicken/3/gettext.html chmod a+r /usr/local/lib/chicken/3/gettext.html * Installing documentation files in /usr/local/lib/chicken/3: cp -r gettext.html /usr/local/lib/chicken/3/gettext.html chmod a+r /usr/local/lib/chicken/3/gettext.setup-info -- -- http://wagerlabs.com ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
Re: [Chicken-users] Friendlier Chicken for Win32
Hallo, Harri Haataja escreveu: On 19/12/2007, Alex Sandro Queiroz e Silva [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Based on my previous (program-filename) patch, I have created a chicken dist for win32 that can be dropped anywhere. csc automatically finds the Chicken compiler, includes and libs. This package may make the life of first-time Chicken users easier. It is in [1]. [1] - http://www.ventonegro.org/chicken/ Sounds nice. This still requires a gcc somewhere? Yes, for compiled Chicken-generated C files. Cheers, -alex ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
Re: [Chicken-users] Friendlier Chicken for Win32
Alex Sandro Queiroz e Silva wrote: Hallo, Harri Haataja escreveu: On 19/12/2007, Alex Sandro Queiroz e Silva [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Based on my previous (program-filename) patch, I have created a chicken dist for win32 that can be dropped anywhere. csc automatically finds the Chicken compiler, includes and libs. This package may make the life of first-time Chicken users easier. It is in [1]. [1] - http://www.ventonegro.org/chicken/ Sounds nice. This still requires a gcc somewhere? Yes, for compiled Chicken-generated C files. Cheers, -alex Hi: You get mingw32 and gcc 3.4.2 when you install DevCpp from http://www.bloodshed.net/devcpp.html/. It's a no brainer install which gives you a nifty IDE as a bonus. The only downside is no auto-config tools so you must create IDE project(s) or a custom external Makefile. I mention this possibility because many free softwares rely on mingw but it does not work for some people. I am one of the mingw-challenged. :-) -Bob- ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
Re: [Chicken-users] compiling chicken using visual studio
On 24/12 15:02:04, Nikola Vouk wrote: Is it possible to compile chicken natively using visual studio instead of mingw? Anybody have an advice or experience trying to compile chicken natively on windows? It *used* to be possible to use CMake to configure/build Chicken on Windows (presumably with the MSVC compiler as well as mingw). I don't know why that option went away - I probably wasn't paying attention if it was ever discussed on the chicken-users list :). (BTW, if anyone can point me to any mailing list threads (either here or on chicken-hackers) talking about the buildsystem changes for 2.7, I'd appreciate it - thanks). Anyway, if you feel like trying it out, it looks like the CMake buildsystem is still available in the latest 2.6* release (2.637). http://chicken.wiki.br/releases/ As far as I understand the CMake system (ie. very approximately), I think on Windows you can use it to generate a Visual Studio project file or MSVC makefile(s) - which you can then use to build Chicken with the MS C/C++ compiler. thanks, nik Pete. -- percussive maintenance, n. The art of beating the crap out of equipment in the hope it will start to work. Disturbingly often successful. -- The Devil's IT Dictionary ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?
On Dec 23, 2007 2:34 AM, John Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: felix winkelmann scripsit: Chicken's interpreter is not strongly performant, but does provide strong debugging facilities. I'd remove that last sentence above. I think it's true: if you want a fast interpreter, you wouldn't use csi, would you? No use implying that Chicken is something it isn't. This is what I get, and what others will get, from that sentence: Chicken is slow. It would be equally true to say that Chicken comes with a reasonably fast interpreter for interactive use and scripting. Imagine this blurb for python: Python, the high-level, interactive object oriented language, includes an extensive class library with lots of goodies for network programming, system administration, sounds and graphics. It's also somewhat slow and not particularly functional, but that hardly matters in practice. ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?
Zbigniew scripsit: It would be equally true to say that Chicken comes with a reasonably fast interpreter for interactive use and scripting. Okay, I'm good with that. Here's the text now: Chicken is an optimizing batch compiler for the R5RS Scheme language. It produces portable, efficient C supporting tail recursion, first-class continuations, and lightweight threads. Interfacing to and from C is emphasized, including both static and dynamic loading of Chicken code, with full support for Posix functions. Chicken comes with a reasonably fast interpreter for interactive use, debugging, and scripting. Chicken also has a repository with hundreds of user-contributed eggs, including most SRFIs and many other widely available Scheme libraries. Any further contributions? Imagine this blurb for python: Point taken. -- The first thing you learn in a lawin' familyJohn Cowan is that there ain't no definite answers [EMAIL PROTECTED] to anything. --Calpurnia in To Kill A Mockingbird ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Debian slander?
On Dec 23, 2007 5:34 PM, John Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: felix winkelmann scripsit: Chicken's interpreter is not strongly performant, but does provide strong debugging facilities. I'd remove that last sentence above. I think it's true: if you want a fast interpreter, you wouldn't use csi, would you? No use implying that Chicken is something it isn't. It's misleading because it's beside the point. When you need speed, you use the compiler. When you don't need speed, any interpreter will do, and the fact that csi is on the slow end of something that is already slow doesn't mean much. The cases where EVAL speed really matter are quite rare so it's confusing to mention them in such a short description. Most newcomers will be used to either entirely compiled or entirely interpreted languages, and if you say that Chicken's EVAL is slow they'll likely assume the language as a whole is slow. I also have issues with the second part of that sentence - I would not consider csi's debugging facilities strong compared to other Scheme implementations (it's about average, and I think we need to raise the bar on Scheme debuggers in general). -- Alex ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
