which paths and %VARS do I need to set so I can use tcc -run ... with
all *.c stuff that chicken produces ?
___
Chicken-hackers mailing list
Chicken-hackers@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers
On Wed, 7 Jun 2017 13:33:47 +0200 fire...@firemail.cc wrote:
> which paths and %VARS do I need to set so I can use tcc -run ...
> with all *.c stuff that chicken produces ?
>
Sorry, TCC is not supported, it doesn’t implement alloca() which is
needed by CHICKEN.
Also, this kind of questions is be
Hi!
This patch adds a counterpart for the export syntax form.
The implementation is pretty straightforward. A new slot, called
module-unexport-list, is added to the module record. Unexport adds
identifiers to this list if the module export list is *. In
##sys#finalize-module all identifiers about
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 9:28 AM, megane wrote:
If the module export list is not *, module-unexport-list is not used. In
> this case, it's enough to just remove the identifier to be unexported
> from the module-export-list.
>
Very nice!
While you are messing around with the module system, I'd lik
> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 9:28 AM, megane wrote:
>
> If the module export list is not *, module-unexport-list is not used. In
> > this case, it's enough to just remove the identifier to be unexported
> > from the module-export-list.
> >
>
> Very nice!
>
> While you are messing around with the mo
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 2:06 PM, wrote:
Isn't it easy to forget particular identifiers that happen to start with
> "fp"
> as well? I think explicit "rename" imports are clearer and less error
> prone.
>
My example is bad: you'd want to use it with a module where all the names
begin with the same
On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 12:41:03PM -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 9:28 AM, megane wrote:
>
> If the module export list is not *, module-unexport-list is not used. In
> > this case, it's enough to just remove the identifier to be unexported
> > from the module-export-list.
> >
>
On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 03:54:43PM -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 2:06 PM, wrote:
>
> Isn't it easy to forget particular identifiers that happen to start with
> > "fp"
> > as well? I think explicit "rename" imports are clearer and less error
> > prone.
> >
>
> My example is ba
On Wed, 7 Jun 2017 22:07:56 +0200 Peter Bex
wrote:
> Both these proposals make me very very uneasy, for slightly different
> but somewhat related reasons.
I strongly agree with you on these points. How CHICKEN’s module
definition works always seemed strange to me.
R7RS is probably what we should
Hi Peter,
Firstly, thank you for the writeup. It takes time and energy to consider
design issues like this, and your effort is appreciated.
On 2017-06-07 22:07, Peter Bex wrote:
> But my more immediate concern is with proliferation of the magic set of
> special forms that's always available in a
Hey Peter,
On 2017-06-06 22:31, Peter Bex wrote:
> I noticed two problems after looking over the file-modification-time
> patches I recently submitted. [...] Attached are patches for this.
Seems sound, pushed.
> Strictly speaking, I suppose we should really add a new C_num_to_size_t
> or such, b
11 matches
Mail list logo