Mike Gran spk...@yahoo.com writes:
In many systems it is desirable for constants (i.e. the values of literal
expressions) to reside in read-only-memory. To express this, it is
convenient to imagine that every object that denotes locations is
associated with a flag telling whether
Bruce Korb bruce.k...@gmail.com writes:
2. it is completely, utterly wrong to mutilate the
Guile library into such a contortion that it
interprets this:
(define y hello)
to be a request to create an immutable string anyway.
It very, very plainly says, make 'y' and
Hi,
I was just wondering about the ability for using multiple continuations
in contexts that don't guarantee an order of execution. Functions like
map, list and other structure builders.
If one uses those for building a structure, and some paths of execution
hit a
Let me see if I understand what you mean. I think you're talking about
an expression like this:
(cons (call/cc store-this-continuation) (call/cc store-this-continuation))
and you want a way to distinguish the first and the second call/cc, by
guaranteeing the order they are hit. This will let
Noah Lavine noah.b.lav...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 8:16 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Hi,
I was just wondering about the ability for using multiple continuations
in contexts that don't guarantee an order of execution. Functions like
map, list and other structure
From: Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org
No, `define' does not copy an object, it merely makes a new reference to
an existing object. This is also true in C for that matter, so this is
behavior is quite mainstream. For example, the following program dies
with SIGSEGV on most modern systems,
Mike Gran spk...@yahoo.com writes:
If you follow that logic, then Guile is left without any shorthand
to create and initialize a mutable string other than
(define y (substring hello 0))
or
(define y (string-copy hello))
Sure. Guile does not have shorthands for _mutable_ literals for
On Wed 04 Jan 2012 12:16, Bruce Korb bk...@gnu.org writes:
We could add a compiler option to turn string literals into (string-copy
FOO). Perhaps that's the thing to do.
No, because your clients have no control over how Guile gets built.
We _do_ have control over startup code, however:
I
On 01/04/12 08:47, Andy Wingo wrote:
I was going to propose a workaround with an option to change
vm-i-loader.c:43 and vm-i-loader.c:115 to use a
scm_i_mutable_string_literals_p instead of 1, but that really seems like
the path to perdition: previously compiled modules would start creating
Bruce Korb bk...@gnu.org writes:
On 01/04/12 04:19, Ian Price wrote:
... As for mutable strings, I consider them
a mistake to begin with,...
Let's step back and consider the whole point of Guile in the first place.
My understanding is that one primary purpose is to be a facilitation
Bruce Korb bruce.k...@gmail.com writes:
On 01/04/12 08:47, Andy Wingo wrote:
I was going to propose a workaround with an option to change
vm-i-loader.c:43 and vm-i-loader.c:115 to use a
scm_i_mutable_string_literals_p instead of 1, but that really seems like
the path to perdition: previously
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
On Wed 04 Jan 2012 12:14, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
We could add a compiler option to turn string literals into
(string-copy FOO). Perhaps that's the thing to do.
What for? It would mean that a literal would
Hi Noah,
I never contributed to this thread, but I've had it marked for months
now, so FWIW...
On Sat 24 Sep 2011 19:58, Noah Lavine noah.b.lav...@gmail.com writes:
So this is my proposal for the next several months: I work on a static
analyzer for Guile, hoping to expand it to other
On Tue 03 Jan 2012 22:44, Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org writes:
If this single file is to be built only during the package build
process, and never modified after that, then it should be super-easy to
invent your own little homebrew format.
Indeed. It would be nice to use ELF, though. I'd
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com writes:
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes:
What for? It would mean that a literal would not be eq? to itself, a
nightmare for memoization purposes.
I agree that it should not be the default behavior, but I don't see the
harm in allowing users to compile their own
On 01/04/12 11:43, Andy Wingo wrote:
The correct behavior is the status quo. We are considering adding a
hack to produce different behavior for compatibility purposes. We don't
have to worry about correctness in that case, only compatibility. IMO
anyway :)
It would be a nice added benefit
Bruce Korb bruce.k...@gmail.com writes:
On 01/04/12 11:43, Andy Wingo wrote:
The correct behavior is the status quo. We are considering adding a
hack to produce different behavior for compatibility purposes. We don't
have to worry about correctness in that case, only compatibility. IMO
Bruce Korb bruce.k...@gmail.com writes:
Who knows where I learned the idiom. I learned the minimal amount of
Guile needed for my purposes a dozen years ago. My actual problem
stems from this:
Backtrace:
In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
170: 3 [catch #t #catch-closure 8b75a0 ...]
In unknown file:
On Thu 29 Sep 2011 16:09, Ian Price ianpric...@googlemail.com writes:
If you've used the (web ...) modules, you may have noticed that guile
does not currently support chunked-encoding. This is expected in a
HTTP/1.1 world, so I wrote an implementation to cover my immediate
need, but I'm not
Bruce Korb bk...@gnu.org writes:
On 01/04/12 04:19, Ian Price wrote:
... As for mutable strings, I consider them
a mistake to begin with,...
Let's step back and consider the whole point of Guile in the first place.
This was not intended as an answer to this question, nor to be
Bruce Korb bk...@gnu.org writes:
You have to go to some extra trouble to be certain that a string
value that you have assigned to an SCM is not read only.
If you're going to mutate a string, you'd better be safe and make a copy
before mutating it, unless you know very clearly where it came
Bruce Korb bk...@gnu.org writes:
On 01/04/12 13:52, Ian Price wrote:
So my main question is:
Which is the higher priority, language purity or ease of use?
That is a loaded question, as it presupposes ease of use is always the
same thing as impurity e.g. ...
Absolutely not. Making
22 matches
Mail list logo
