Re: [Chicken-users] type problem with mbox egg

2011-09-06 Thread Ivan Raikov
Hello, Moritz, Thanks for using the mbox library. The documentation was not up-to-date, which has been fixed now. Some time ago, I generalized the parsing procedures of mbox so that they can take different types of input streams. I have now created an additional module, mbox-string, which is a

Re: [Chicken-users] Grumpy comments on eggs and an idea.

2011-09-06 Thread Ivan Raikov
Hi guys, I must admit that the documentation is a bit obtuse, but I laughed at Matt's characterization that the interface is for geniuses :-) I am now creating "turn key" string-specialized variants of csv and mbox (which suffers from the same problem as csv), and updating the documentation, a

Re: [Chicken-users] Grumpy comments on eggs and an idea.

2011-09-06 Thread Moritz Heidkamp
Hi Matt, Matt Welland writes: > After a long day of work and being very much in the mode of "just getting > the job done" I ran into the need to parse csv. Cool. I know that there is > an egg for that. After installing the csv egg I looked at the documentation > and my heart sunk. This was not an

Re: [Chicken-users] Another types.db correction

2011-09-06 Thread Felix
From: Subject: [Chicken-users] Another types.db correction Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2011 00:01:51 -0700 > Here's another typed.db bug, where vector-resize is missing the optional > specifier (values to use to initialize the enlarged vector.) > > I've been using this patch in the last several days: > -

[Chicken-users] Another types.db correction

2011-09-06 Thread chick0
Here's another typed.db bug, where vector-resize is missing the optional specifier (values to use to initialize the enlarged vector.) I've been using this patch in the last several days: --- types.db~ 2011-08-31 09:21:34.0 -0700 +++ types.db2011-08-31 21:07:10.0 -0700 @@ -10

Re: [Chicken-users] types.db incorrect

2011-09-06 Thread Felix
> What I would really have a use for was, > if > the assertions from types.db or whatever I pass with additional -types > parameters would be turned into runtime assertions (before call and > before > return) if, and only if, I pass a certain switch to the compiler. Can you give an example of thi