On Sun, Dec 03, 2017 at 06:46:14AM -0500, David Goffredo wrote:
> So my question is why the compiler doesn't warn on:
>
> (printed foo)
>
> when it can be determined statically that the argument has (rather -- is
> declared to have) an incompatible type. Maybe the types will be compatible
> a
Thank you for your helpful response, Peter.
I will be mindful of Chicken's dynamic nature when using the type
system. But as you said, declared types are gospel. I would expect that
means when I write:
(: foo (or string false))
I'm declaring that the name "foo" shall have the type that i
On Sat, Dec 02, 2017 at 08:56:52PM -0500, David Goffredo wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I've been playing around with Chicken for about a month now, and so far
> really enjoy it. Even got it building and (mostly) working on crusty old AIX
> and Solaris machines.
Hi David,
Cool! That's very good t
