> Here's my suggested syntax, keeping it XML-compliant:
>
> [bold="yes|no"] [see="other topic"]/>
Hmm, I think this would be very redundant with the following syntax,
which not only is already support, I also find easier to type:
> == List procedures
>
> ...
>
> === Append
>
On 2008 Feb 21, at 03:38, Alejandro Forero Cuervo wrote:
Sure, good thinking. I've created this document:
http://chicken.wiki.br/wiki-syntax-chicken
...
Suggestions would be appreciated. :-)
The page is much appreciated, and I now have a much better vision of
how the markup is
going.
Yes please. Quick procedure lookup is the capability of Info I most miss.
A plain index page would also be just as good for my purposes.
On 2/21/08, Alejandro Forero Cuervo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> While this will continue to work, I think what I'll do is, once I have
> the and similar tags
John Cowan wrote:
Ashley scripsit:
Attached is a patch (which hopefully the list software allows)
with a makefile and some related mods for building chicken with
Visual C. This is a gnu makefile and is integrated with the
regular build system, so you'll need cygwin or something similar
to d
On Feb 21, 2008, at 1:40 PM, Alejandro Forero Cuervo wrote:
I hereby humbly propose the removal of key-on from the combinators egg
on the basis that it is entirely redundant with cmp-key in the orders
egg, except for the fact that the documentation for the orders egg
needs a bit of love and car
I hereby humbly propose the removal of key-on from the combinators egg
on the basis that it is entirely redundant with cmp-key in the orders
egg, except for the fact that the documentation for the orders egg
needs a bit of love and care.
Alejo.
http://azul.freaks-unidos.net/
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 3:26 PM, Kon Lovett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I find that I use these two procedures frequently, and I'd love to see
> > them in an egg so I don't need to keep including them locally. Perhaps
> > is someone interested in working on a shared misc-combinators egg, to
>
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Kon Lovett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Some day, we might want to offer an alternate way of marking which
> > procs should be indexed, or providing a formal exports list, like the
> > (declare ) form but for interpreted files as well. That would cover
> > th
> (define (key-on proc #!optional (comparator <))
> ;; Define a comparator function for a sort. E.g. to sort a list of
> ;; lists by their first items, using string-case-insensitive
> ;; comparison: (sort lst (key-on first string-ci (lambda (a b) (comparator (proc a) (proc b
This sound
On Feb 21, 2008, at 12:15 PM, Graham Fawcett wrote:
Hi folks,
I find that I use these two procedures frequently, and I'd love to see
them in an egg so I don't need to keep including them locally. Perhaps
is someone interested in working on a shared misc-combinators egg, to
store handy little t
Sorry, forgot to answer some of your questions:
> (wiki-db-update-symbols! db-file base-path file-path) -> boolean
>
> Would the absolute file pathname be (make-pathname base-path file-
> path)?
Yes.
> The "file" column is what? An absolute pathname, a relative pathname,
> a filename w/ exte
> This change is not only inconsistent with the way most svn
> repositories tend to be used and redundant with the standard practices
> of /tags and /branches, but it puts a burden on the maintainers, when
> I think we ought to be striving for the opposite goal. Maintainers
> are short on time; we
Hi folks,
I find that I use these two procedures frequently, and I'd love to see
them in an egg so I don't need to keep including them locally. Perhaps
is someone interested in working on a shared misc-combinators egg, to
store handy little things like this?
If such an egg exists and I'm not awar
> Please note that from now on you have to chose for which release you
> want eggs to be updated: any commits to the old egg directories (as
> well as creating new egg directories) will be only available for pre
> 3.0.0 chickens. Chickens version 3.0.0rc1 and higher donwload eggs
> from a different
On Feb 21, 2008, at 12:05 PM, Graham Fawcett wrote:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 2:35 PM, Alejandro Forero Cuervo
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is that possible, given that reading the Scheme file may require
custom syntax?
It may not be possible to do it reliably, but if we get just 50% of
the ca
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 2:35 PM, Alejandro Forero Cuervo
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is that possible, given that reading the Scheme file may require
> > custom syntax?
>
> It may not be possible to do it reliably, but if we get just 50% of
> the cases right, that's an improvement. I suspect
> Is that possible, given that reading the Scheme file may require
> custom syntax?
It may not be possible to do it reliably, but if we get just 50% of
the cases right, that's an improvement. I suspect with some lovin' we
should be able to get 90% or so. :-)
Alejo.
http://azul.freaks-unidos.net
> I will take on this burden ;-)
>
> (wiki-db-update-symbols! db-file base-path file-path) -> boolean
>
> Would the absolute file pathname be (make-pathname base-path file-
> path)? Or is is file-path not relative? (If it isn't why the base path?)
>
> The "file" column is what? An absolute path
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 2:22 PM, Kon Lovett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > could someone create a function that receives (1) a base path
> > containing a checkout of the chicken-eggs svn repository, (2) a path
> > to some file inside the repository and (3) a sqlite3 database with
> > said table
On Feb 21, 2008, at 10:55 AM, Alejandro Forero Cuervo wrote:
Given the following SQL table:
CREATE TABLE symbols (
symbol varchar,
file varchar,
line integer );
could someone create a function that receives (1) a base path
containing a checkout of the chicken-eggs svn repository
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Alejandro Forero Cuervo
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Given the following SQL table:
>
> CREATE TABLE symbols (
> symbol varchar,
> file varchar,
> line integer );
>
> could someone create a function that receives (1) a base path
> containing a checko
> Here is how I do it:
>
> $ ln -s 'stream-ext#stream-xcons' stream-xcons
> $ svn add stream-xcons
> $ svn ci -m "Creating link for procedure stream-xcons"
While this will continue to work, I think what I'll do is, once I have
the and similar tags in place, use this information to
populate a dat
Given the following SQL table:
CREATE TABLE symbols (
symbol varchar,
file varchar,
line integer );
could someone create a function that receives (1) a base path
containing a checkout of the chicken-eggs svn repository, (2) a path
to some file inside the repository and (3) a sqlite3
Alex Shinn wrote:
quasiquote is syntax - it happens at compile-time, so to
apply it to dynamic data at runtime you need to call EVAL:
Thanks, I understand it now. I keep thinking of macros as first-class, when
they're not. :-(
(Which leads me to wonder, *are* there Lisps/Schemes that have
Ashley scripsit:
> Attached is a patch (which hopefully the list software allows)
> with a makefile and some related mods for building chicken with
> Visual C. This is a gnu makefile and is integrated with the
> regular build system, so you'll need cygwin or something similar
> to do the build.
Alejandro Forero Cuervo wrote:
I think it would be overkill if we did it on a procedure-by-
procedure basis. It would make editing a bit cumbersome for what it
gets us, I think.
I don't know, I think that a topic system with egg granularity
wouldn't be of much use. We already have egg cate
> What about the topics="" attribute we discussed a few days ago?
Ooops, sorry, I forgot about that attribute.
I think it would be overkill if we did it on a procedure-by-procedure
basis. It would make editing a bit cumbersome for what it gets us, I
think.
> Is that going to be , or did I misu
Alejandro Forero Cuervo wrote:
I've created this document: http://chicken.wiki.br/wiki-syntax-chicken
Note that I've expanded and to and
respectively.
I've also added a bit more details about how to include examples. I
expect to automatically build a page including all the examples an
Sorry, that previous mail was so eager to go out —it couldn't wait, oh
no, it was too good for that— that it managed to escape before I could
finish it.
So, the support for the new tags will be added by extending the
chicken.scm extension used by the stream-wiki code. This extension
currently def
> So, will the stream-wiki egg be updated accordingly? The post-commit
> stuff does a wiki->html conversion, so we have to get access to
> the new markup.
This will be done by adding code to the chicken.scm file (which is
already used by the post-commit stuff for the tag.
Alejo.
http://azul.frea
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 12:38 PM, Alejandro Forero Cuervo
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm losing sight of the changes a bit. Could you please update the
> > wiki-syntax doc so we have something to work with for the hackathon?
>
> Sure, good thinking. I've created this document:
>
> http://
> I'm losing sight of the changes a bit. Could you please update the
> wiki-syntax doc so we have something to work with for the hackathon?
Sure, good thinking. I've created this document:
http://chicken.wiki.br/wiki-syntax-chicken
Note that I've expanded and to and
respectively.
I've a
Hans Nowak scripsit:
> ...and I understand *why* they don't work, but I can't figure out how to
> take s and transform it into (foo bar 42). Maybe I'm stupid, but I just
> don't see it. Is it possible? Or do I need to do something entirely
> different?
As has been pointed out, you can use e
On 2/21/08, Alejandro Forero Cuervo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So I'll add support for , and .
>
> Does that sound good to you?
Sure. If it's a problem in practice, we can always fix it later.
___
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-users@nongnu.org
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 12:42:00AM -0800, Alejandro Forero Cuervo wrote:
> I think this wouldn't be very hard to do, since they would all behave
> pretty much in the same way. We can probably just keep a list with
> them (ie. '(string class method)) that we add to as needed.
>
> That is, I think
> > What if instead of and
> > we simply use ? Would that work?
>
> Functionally yes, but I can only think of one person who has ever
> used 'string' in an egg: myself. In my opinion, the tag
> should be there for really unusual cases such as that, since
> we can't think of every type of defin
On 2/21/08, Alejandro Forero Cuervo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think we should stick to , and so on. They are easier
> to type than , and so on.
I agree.
> What if instead of and
> we simply use ? Would that work?
Functionally yes, but I can only think of one person who has ever
used 'st
37 matches
Mail list logo
