On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 10:07 PM, Peter Bex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi there,
While converting some more documentation to the wiki, I noticed something
weird:
* There's both a tk and a PS-tk egg. Neither of these is marked deprecated.
* PS-tk seems to be a derivative of tk
* PS-tk
Hi all. I'm very interested in Scheme and CHICKEN but haven't write any
program yet :))
I faced some trouble when installing bb egg in mingw-msys. There is no
issues in Linux. But I like to be cross-platform in FLTK.
First of all there is a bug (or typo) in csc.scm when specifying libs for
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 09:05:56AM +0100, felix winkelmann wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 10:07 PM, Peter Bex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi there,
While converting some more documentation to the wiki, I noticed something
weird:
* There's both a tk and a PS-tk egg. Neither of these
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 09:55:01AM +0100, minh thu wrote:
Hi
I'm trying to use spiffy. I've a little problem which is in fact
related to the 'http' egg.
Using the 'server example' from the 'http' wiki page with firefox,
firefox try to load the page for ever; it's only when I kill the
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Peter Bex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How about the deprecation? Should the 'tk' egg be deprecated considering
PS-tk is a continuation of that work?
I don't know. AFAIK the APIs are slightly different, but I recall
some users found PS-tk's an improvement. We
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 08:04:23PM -0700, Matt Gushee wrote:
Wait a minute, though. I understand now why
(('a) ...)
didn't match, but how is it that
('a ...)
isn't a syntax error? Is it because 'a expands to (quote a), and is thus
treated by case as a list of the symbols quote
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 9:45 AM, Andrei Ivushkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all. I'm very interested in Scheme and CHICKEN but haven't write any
program yet :))
I faced some trouble when installing bb egg in mingw-msys. There is no
issues in Linux. But I like to be cross-platform in FLTK.
dbi:query-fold, dbi:query-map, query-for-each. I thought about
implementing these, but I
haven't been able to think of the use case that makes them
necessary in the presence
Scheme's fold, map, and for-each, other than as shorthand (which
could be define'd
in place in
i have a mostly working set of mods for vim 7.0 for scheme syntax, if you want
em... i dont know what the current version of vim is and if theyre back
compat though.
-elf
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Tobia Conforto wrote:
I've also been working on the main Scheme syntax file, but that's a major
Elf wrote:
i have a mostly working set of mods for vim 7.0 for scheme syntax,
if you want em... i dont know what the current version of vim is
and if theyre back compat though.
Sure, post them here
We should join our efforts and work on a single Vim script-set for
Chicken!
As for
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 10:53 PM, Ozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How is (sql-null?) harder or less intuitive?
It's not harder, but not being able to use null? to test for NULL is
counterintuitive in my eyes.
I know what you're saying. I guess I just like to keep my different
types of nulls
Hi Daishi,
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 1:28 AM, Daishi Kato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Graham Fawcett wrote:
Sure. My first version was an SCGI server, but later I switched to
HTTP. I usually host behind Apache, and moving from mod_scgi to
mod_proxy was pretty straightforward, and in return
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 2:43 AM, felix winkelmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 3:47 AM, Graham Fawcett
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Felix, I believe that Johannes is no longer maintaining the postgresql
egg. I would be happy to maintain it if no one objects.
Cool, that
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 09:47:08AM -0500, Graham Fawcett wrote:
Yes, input port was what I was thinking. Thanks. The input port would
return the body of the LOB and return #!eof when it's consumed.
The Chicken blob or string options are redundant, so the revised
proposal is to represent a
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 2:40 AM, felix winkelmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 10:31 PM, Peter Bex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 04:23:37PM -0500, Graham Fawcett wrote:
Can you even check for void? Afaik there's no VOID? procedure.
You
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 9:54 AM, Peter Bex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 09:47:08AM -0500, Graham Fawcett wrote:
Yes, input port was what I was thinking. Thanks. The input port would
return the body of the LOB and return #!eof when it's consumed.
The Chicken blob or
Alex Shinn wrote:
the column info should be present once, not duplicated for every
row. Since you may want to manage a huge number of rows in memory
at once it makes sense to optimize for size. This could be a vector
but it would probably be best to leave it unspecified and use an
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 7:31 PM, Tobia Conforto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Graham Fawcett wrote:
There does seem to be a good case for an immediate value that *can*
be tested this way, though. John et. al. wouldn't have used (void)
in eggs if there weren't.
What about providing a
18 matches
Mail list logo
