On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 7:48 PM, Ivan Raikov ivan.g.rai...@gmail.com wrote:
For the time being, I have reverted srfi-18.scm to that of Chicken
release 3.4.0. This fixes the issues you reported with srfi-18 and
srfi-27.
I have restored the latest version of srfi-18 and fixed some bugs and
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 3:19 AM, Jan Baumgart raga.r...@gmx.de wrote:
Hi!
Is it possible, to make subsequent calls to CHICKEN_eval from within
different nonreentrant(!) threads?
No, the chicken runtime system is not thread-safe.
cheers,
felix
Sorry, I've mixed up the terminology for reentrant.
I actually meant the opposite:
The chicken runtime system gets called only after the previous call
(from another thread) has returned.
Chicken_eval gets blocked by a mutex lock.
I've also tested the scenario without the locks, to avoid any
Hello,
even if the calls don't occur in parallel, invoking the CHICKEN
interpreter from different threads is problematic, since distinct
threads usually have distinct stacks which will get CHICKEN's
allocator confused.
If you manage to update the stack base pointer for the allocator
before
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Peter Danenberg pe...@ck12.org wrote:
Should we just pull it down from:
https://galinha.ucpel.tche.br/svn/chicken-eggs/chicken/branches/chicken-3/
or are you going to make a release?
It will make it into 3.5.2, but it doesn't contain any functionality
or
Hi again,
This may seem like a strange question, but I'm confused about the use of
set!.It may be a holdover from my pre-scheme days, but it seems I
should be declaring a variable before using it with set!. In other
words, I would use:
(let
((x 0))
before setting x
William Ramsay scripsit:
This may seem like a strange question, but I'm confused about the use
of set!. It may be a holdover from my pre-scheme days, but it seems
I should be declaring a variable before using it with set!.
A Scheme implementation is allowed to either let you set! variables
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 3:12 PM, William Ramsay ramsa...@comcast.net wrote:
This may seem like a strange question, but I'm confused about the use of
set!. It may be a holdover from my pre-scheme days, but it seems I should
be declaring a variable before using it with set!
William,
Check
2009-02-26 William Ramsay ramsa...@comcast.net:
[...]
But it appears that set! itself declares the variable and the let is not
needed.
[...]
And if set! does declare a variable what is it's scope?
[...]
Hello,
if I'm not mistaken, using set! on a variable that hasn't been
declared is
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Jim Ursetto zbignie...@gmail.com wrote:
You might prefer, for style or portability, to have a dummy definition
at toplevel, such as (define foo #f) or just (define foo), prior to
performing the set!.
Whoops. To be clear, (define foo) is a Chicken extension.
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 08:14:41PM -0500, Taylor Venable wrote:
Using Chicken 3.5.0 on OpenBSD 4.5-beta I get segmentation faults when using
the
http egg. This occurs every time when a 404 or 500 error is generated by the
http-server.
Happily, this seems to have been fixed by reverting the
Quoth Taylor Venable on Boomtime, the 57th of Chaos:
Happily, this seems to have been fixed by reverting the SRFI-18
implementation in devel release 3.5.1 - thanks!
Christ; no wonder SRFI-18 is in core: its reach is almost ubiquitous.
___
I'm working on trying to port the synch egg to chicken 4 as it's
required by a few others (notably sqlite3). However I have no code
that uses it without requirements to many other eggs that aren't part
of chicken 4. If anyone has any test code for synch, or other code
that should run cleanly on
13 matches
Mail list logo
