On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 2:42 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Nala Ginrut nalagin...@gmail.com writes:
I try to port sweet-expression to newest Guile. Fortunately, the
author wrote a compatible version for old Guile in 2008. So I just try
to rewrite part of it for some obvious
On Tue 06 Mar 2012 04:16, Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org writes:
Your thoughts on that weak set mechanism would be appreciated.
Everything I know about weak storage mechanisms I learned from Bruno
Haible. Highly recommended reading:
Hello all,
Here's an improved version of the Efficient Gensym Hack (v2).
Mark
From 5f558244261f3a22217d5136d0aebb7f644d7efb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 09:51:17 -0500
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] Don't lock mutex to set shared flag on
Hi Mark!
I haven’t looked into the details, but this looks like a great
initiative!
However, could you add tests for the decompiler? Especially since it’s
the kind of stuff that easily bitrots (I think we’ve had warnings in
parts of the decompilation towers for ages.)
Thanks!
Ludo’.
Hi,
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com skribis:
I have pushed a patch to master that changes the implementation of the
dynamic stack
The “dynwind stack” actually (I misread it the first time.)
from being a linked list on the heap to being an actual stack. This
allows us to push items on the stack
Hi Ludovic!
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
I sympathize with the idea of ChangeLogs as in the GCS (info
(standards) Change Log Concepts), and in particular:
There's no need to describe the full purpose of the changes or how
they work together. However, sometimes it is useful
Hello!
I sympathize with the idea of ChangeLogs as in the GCS (info
(standards) Change Log Concepts), and in particular:
There's no need to describe the full purpose of the changes or how
they work together. However, sometimes it is useful to write one line
to describe the overall
Greets :)
On Tue 06 Mar 2012 18:20, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com skribis:
I have pushed a patch to master that changes the implementation of the
dynamic stack
The “dynwind stack” actually (I misread it the first time.)
Yes, it did have this name
On Tue 06 Mar 2012 19:13, Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org writes:
but please put the full explanation in comments
in the code, where people will see it whenever they see the code.
Do you think it’s bikeshedding? :-)
Not at all! Thank you for nudging us in the direction of better code
Hi,
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com skribis:
On Tue 06 Mar 2012 18:13, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com skribis:
commit dab48cc567f931b275ad647db1e47135b63c6675
Author: Andy Wingo wi...@pobox.com
Date: Fri Mar 2 17:46:28 2012 +0100
tweaks to -Wformat's
Greets,
On Tue 06 Mar 2012 21:40, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
I think the forward declaration test was not quite right, because it
would not work with a local (define _ gettext). That's why I changed
the test from checking that a warning was issued on a local (define _
...) to
Hello,
The “dynwind stack” actually (I misread it the first time.)
Yes, it did have this name before. (More often, the wind list.) But
since dynwind is overloaded so much (dynamic-wind operator, dynwind,
scm_dynwind_*), and the dynamic stack can have other things on it like
prompts, I
12 matches
Mail list logo
