Hi Noah,
Just a few superficial stylistic comments until I have something more
clever to say: ;-)
"Noah Lavine" skribis:
> (define default-environment
> - `( (cons . ,(value-set-with-values 'cons))
> - (car . ,(value-set-with-values 'car))
> - (cdr . ,(value-set-with-values 'cdr))
>
Hello,
>> If I understand correctly, Mark wants to restrict the set of variables
>> you can access to those you could access through normal Scheme code.
>> This is an issue because psyntax happens to provide a way to access
>> more variables than standard Scheme. If this is the case, I think we
>>
Hi Noah!
This sounds like exciting work, although there’s not much yet to comment
on I suppose. ;-)
Please keep informing the list so we can see what you’re up to (even if
we don’t necessary reply in a timely fashion...)
Thanks, and happy compiler hacking!
Ludo’.
Hi Noah,
And as is more often the case, sorry for the delay!
Noah Lavine skribis:
> It is a propagation network. Basically you have a graph of Tree-IL
> nodes, where each Tree-IL node is connected to its parent, its
> children, and optionally other nodes (a variable is connected to the
> place
Hi Nala!
I just added a ‘scandir’ implementation in terms of ‘file-system-fold’:
http://git.sv.gnu.org/cgit/guile.git/commit/?h=stable-2.0&id=1629429d63170b1c5a19e72e838cab331c7eba8b
Please let me know what you think of it!
Thanks,
Ludo’.
Let me first state that this thread is arguing at a depth where the only
contributions that remain for me to make are syllogisms without an
actual knowledge of what I am talking about.
In order not to appear ungrateful, I will do that, but there will be
little point in expecting me to be of assis
Hello,
>> Indeed, only the macro expander has enough information to generate an
>> optimal list of "reachable lexicals", i.e. lexical variables that are
>> accessible using normal symbols (as opposed to syntax objects) [more
>> on this below].
>
> Are you certain that you want to restrict the set
On Sun 18 Dec 2011 08:11, Mark H Weaver writes:
> So, it turns out that the best place to transform (the-environment) into
> standard scheme code is in the macro expander itself.
Are you certain that it is desirable to transform it into standard
Scheme code?
The statement that the-environment a
