Hi,
Jon Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thanks for the pointer. Do you know of any documentation on module
> binder procs? I've looked in the manual and, (as usual) it doesn't
> really say much of anything about them.
First, I think the "as usual" is a bit unfair. ;-)
Second, if you use
Hi Andy,
I (clearly) don't think it is silly, but I don't think that the guile
developers should think it is silly either, as one of guile's original
goals was to be able to emulate other languages. Bash is a quite common
and useful language, so why shouldn't we try to emulate it? My idea
wo
> > Just in case you haven't already heard about it, you might check out
> > scsh.
> I've looked at scsh. The whole (run (ls)) thing is just too much noise
> for me. It is slightly better than (system "ls"), but I still don't
> quite like it well enough.
Then you might prefer Tcl. What you'v
Hi Jon,
I think your idea is silly. However you might implement it via module
binder procs. See http://article.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.user/3321
for an idea of how this can be done.
Regards,
Wingo.
--
http://wingolog.org/
___
Guile-user mailing
Hi Per,
Per Bothner wrote:
You really don't want to do non-trivial programming in bash ...
Also, remember it's a different niche. If you try to combine bash
and scheme, you might get something that sort-of-works but has
terrible performance, debugability, etc.
But this is precisely what I'm ai
Hi Robby,
Just in case you haven't already heard about it, you might check out
scsh.
I've looked at scsh. The whole (run (ls)) thing is just too much noise
for me. It is slightly better than (system "ls"), but I still don't
quite like it well enough.
Regards,
Jon
__
Jon Wilson wrote:
Per Bothner wrote:
You really have to treat ls as a macro, which is resolved at
compile-time. Otherwise, it becomes near-impossible to
compile name-lookup efficiently. And if you can't compile
it, it's a toy.
Bash script is not compiled, but it is quite useful. Not a toy at
Hi,
Jon Wilson wrote:
Perhaps the best way to implement this would be as an error handler
for the Unbound variable error.
Except the more I think about it, the more I suspect that this would in
fact require restarts a la common lisp. Why doesn't scheme (except MIT
scheme) have restarts, anywa
Hi Per,
Per Bothner wrote:
You really have to treat ls as a macro, which is resolved at
compile-time. Otherwise, it becomes near-impossible to
compile name-lookup efficiently. And if you can't compile
it, it's a toy.
Bash script is not compiled, but it is quite useful. Not a toy at all.
>
Jon Wilson wrote:
Or, for instance, we might do:
(ls -a /home/fooguy/.gnome*)
The return value of such an expression would be a read-write port
connected to stdin and stdout for the program running. When eval found
a symbol in the first spot of a list that it didn't know,
You really have t
Hi,
I've been toying with an odd little idea for a bit. It would add a
whole slew of symbols to guile's toplevel, but might well make it much
more useful as a shell or as a system administration scripting
language. Suppose that we could run executable files found in the $PATH
as if we were j
11 matches
Mail list logo
