Any objections?
Best,
Mark
>From 0bd8c303c81b2fbb3ed9d9641e0d280c6336 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Mark H Weaver
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 15:09:42 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] Fix the R6RS exact-integer-sqrt and import into core guile
* libguile/numbers.c (scm_exact_integer_sqrt): New C proce
Hi!
Mark H Weaver writes:
> exact-integer-sqrt is broken. It is now implemented in (rnrs base) by
> doing an inexact sqrt and coercing the answer to exact. This fails
> badly for large integers:
>
> scheme@(guile-user)> (use-modules ((rnrs base) #:version (6)))
> scheme@(guile-user)> (exac
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>> I'd like to push this to stable-2.0. Any objections?
>
> Not from me!
Excellent! :)
> One remark:
>
>> --- a/libguile/numbers.h
>> +++ b/libguile/numbers.h
>> @@ -289,6 +289,7 @@ SCM_API SCM scm_log (SCM z);
>> SCM_API SCM scm_log10 (SCM z);
>> SCM_API
Hello!
Mark H Weaver writes:
>>> +SCM_API void scm_exact_integer_sqrt (SCM k, SCM *s, SCM *r);
>>
>> Shouldn’t it be SCM_INTERNAL? (If yes, then the doc should use @deffn
>> instead of @deftypefn.)
>
> Why do you think the C interface should be kept internal? Most of the
> core arithmetic proc
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>> Why do you think the C interface should be kept internal? Most of the
>> core arithmetic procedures provide public C interfaces. Why should
>> exact-integer-sqrt be treated differently?
>
> Because:
>
> 1. I think we shouldn’t augment the C API unless s
Hello,
> 1. I think we shouldn’t augment the C API unless strictly necessary,
> because the idea is to write Scheme, not C, and because of the
> maintenance cost.
Why would we not want to augment the C API?
It seems like a natural complement to augmenting the Scheme API, since
Guile is
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> 1. I think we shouldn’t augment the C API unless strictly necessary,
> because the idea is to write Scheme, not C, and because of the
> maintenance cost.
At the risk of repeating myself:
The main attraction of using libguile for me is the fac
Hi Mark,
Mark H Weaver writes:
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>>> Why do you think the C interface should be kept internal? Most of the
>>> core arithmetic procedures provide public C interfaces. Why should
>>> exact-integer-sqrt be treated differently?
>>
>> Because:
>>
>> 1. I th
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> OK. I was thinking that I’d use C when dealing with fixnums or floats,
> and let Guile manage bignums and similar—in which case writing C doesn’t
> seem to help much.
>
> Do you think there are use cases for using this interface from C?
It is a fair questi
Hi Mark!
Mark H Weaver writes:
> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>> OK. I was thinking that I’d use C when dealing with fixnums or floats,
>> and let Guile manage bignums and similar—in which case writing C doesn’t
>> seem to help much.
>>
>> Do you think there are use cases for using th
Hi Mark,
[...]
> Sometimes there's no good reason to use C, but it's simply due to a
> developer's personal preference. Maybe they don't have much experience
> writing Scheme and are much more comfortable in C. Maybe they already
> had this big pile of C code before they learned to love Scheme.
You make good points, but I disagree. I think the ideal for Guile
should be a situation where C and Scheme can be used basically
interchangeably, with Guile providing the glue in between.
A situation like that would certainly lead people to write as much as
possible in Scheme, because if C and Sch
On Sat 09 Apr 2011 21:35, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>> If we wish for libguile to be attractive for use by projects
>> primarily written in C, we ought to extinguish this unfortunate
>> recent tendency to say "people ought to be writing Scheme not C", and
>> we ought to stop using tha
Hi Noah,
> You make good points, but I disagree. I think the ideal for Guile
> should be a situation where C and Scheme can be used basically
> interchangeably, with Guile providing the glue in between.
Of course one can disagree, but then it immediately follows that there
is no "ideal for guile"
On Wed 13 Apr 2011 10:59, Detlev Zundel writes:
> But in the end maybe it is a question of whether one sees guile as a
> scheme interpreter with the possibility to interface easily with C or if
> one thinks of guile as a C library with a language built in. For me it
> is the first choice but you
Hi Detlev,
Detlev Zundel writes:
> Maybe it doesn't make sense to continue this discussion on a theoretical
> basis. Because on a theoretical basis I would probably cite the rule of
> modularity or even Antoine de Saint-Exupery:
>
> Perfection (in design) is achieved not when there is nothing
Hi Mark,
> Since you don't want to continue this discussion on a theoretical basis,
> can you please provide a concrete example of how the addition of
> scm_exact_integer_sqrt might be a maintenance burden in the future,
> given that our public C interface already consists of approximately 2K
> fu
17 matches
Mail list logo
