Re: [Chicken-users] ,tr not working Chicken 4.6.0

2010-12-02 Thread David Dreisigmeyer
Thanks again! I've done this in my .emacs, though your's would be more general: ;; CHICKEN (defun chicken () "Run Chicken Scheme in an Emacs buffer." (interactive) (paredit-mode +1) (let ((scheme-program-name "/usr/local/bin/csi -:c -R trace")) (run-scheme scheme-program-n

Re: [Chicken-users] ,tr not working Chicken 4.6.0

2010-12-02 Thread Mario Domenech Goulart
On Thu, 2 Dec 2010 14:32:45 -0500 David Dreisigmeyer wrote: > Thank you Mario! > > One more thing: Is it possible to autoload eggs at the command line, > so I wouldn't have to do (require-extension trace)? I have a > "chicken" function in my .emacs so it would be nice to be able to > handle all

Re: [Chicken-users] ,tr not working Chicken 4.6.0

2010-12-02 Thread David Dreisigmeyer
Thank you Mario! One more thing: Is it possible to autoload eggs at the command line, so I wouldn't have to do (require-extension trace)? I have a "chicken" function in my .emacs so it would be nice to be able to handle all of this in that function. Thanks again, -Dave On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 2

Re: [Chicken-users] ,tr not working Chicken 4.6.0

2010-12-02 Thread Mario Domenech Goulart
Hi David On Thu, 2 Dec 2010 14:19:58 -0500 David Dreisigmeyer wrote: > Thanks Mario. I thought I was using at least 4.4.0 yesterday, but > that must be wrong. I was following: > > http://wiki.call-cc.org/man/4/Getting%20started > > Maybe the manual should be updated to remove the ,tr example?

Re: [Chicken-users] ,tr not working Chicken 4.6.0

2010-12-02 Thread David Dreisigmeyer
Thanks Mario. I thought I was using at least 4.4.0 yesterday, but that must be wrong. I was following: http://wiki.call-cc.org/man/4/Getting%20started Maybe the manual should be updated to remove the ,tr example? On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Mario Domenech Goulart wrote: > Hi David > > On

Re: [Chicken-users] ,tr not working Chicken 4.6.0

2010-12-02 Thread Mario Domenech Goulart
Hi David On Thu, 2 Dec 2010 13:50:02 -0500 David Dreisigmeyer wrote: > For some reason ,tr is not working for me. It worked yesterday so I'm > not sure what may have happened. Same thing is happening with > Macports 4.4.0 version. IIRC, the tracing feature has been moved to an egg (http://wi

Re: [Chicken-users] llvm-gcc / clang

2010-12-02 Thread Peter Bex
On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 04:16:21PM +0100, Thomas Chust wrote: > what about using > > #include > [...] > if (isnan(x)) ... > > or maybe > > [...] > if (fpclassify(x) == FP_NAN) ... > > instead of a comparison? I would expect the compiler to inline these > calls and produce equally eff

[Chicken-users] ,tr not working Chicken 4.6.0

2010-12-02 Thread David Dreisigmeyer
For some reason ,tr is not working for me. It worked yesterday so I'm not sure what may have happened. Same thing is happening with Macports 4.4.0 version. CHICKEN (c)2008-2010 The Chicken Team (c)2000-2007 Felix L. Winkelmann Version 4.6.0 macosx-unix-gnu-x86-64 [ 64bit manyargs dload ptables ]

Re: [Chicken-users] llvm-gcc / clang

2010-12-02 Thread Thomas Chust
2010/12/1 Felix : > [...] > Oh, and clang gave me stupid warnings that where actually wrong > (an "x == x" comparison of floats to detect NaN, which is IMHO > totally correct, triggers a warning - but I'm sure John can give > us the correct interpretation of the standard C semantics). > [...] Hell

Re: [Chicken-users] llvm-gcc / clang

2010-12-02 Thread Felix
From: John Cowan Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] llvm-gcc / clang Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 08:35:21 -0500 > Felix scripsit: > >> Oh, and clang gave me stupid warnings that where actually wrong >> (an "x == x" comparison of floats to detect NaN, which is IMHO >> totally correct, triggers a warning - bu

Re: [Chicken-users] llvm-gcc / clang

2010-12-02 Thread John Cowan
Felix scripsit: > Oh, and clang gave me stupid warnings that where actually wrong > (an "x == x" comparison of floats to detect NaN, which is IMHO > totally correct, triggers a warning - but I'm sure John can give > us the correct interpretation of the standard C semantics). ISO C doesn't require