From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Neil Jerram Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: set-program-arguments from scheme Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 23:08:52 +0000 Message-ID: <87fyaemsmz.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> References: <87k5zqimya.fsf@zip.com.au> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1168729761 13329 80.91.229.12 (13 Jan 2007 23:09:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 23:09:21 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Jan 14 00:09:16 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1H5rzt-0002xt-Cp for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 14 Jan 2007 00:09:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H5rzr-0003CW-Tp for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 13 Jan 2007 18:09:11 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H5rzm-0003BH-0x for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 13 Jan 2007 18:09:06 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H5rzk-00039G-3B for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 13 Jan 2007 18:09:04 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H5rzj-000393-9D for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 13 Jan 2007 18:09:03 -0500 Original-Received: from [80.84.72.33] (helo=mail3.uklinux.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1H5rzi-00025j-Sc for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 13 Jan 2007 18:09:03 -0500 Original-Received: from laruns (host86-145-157-83.range86-145.btcentralplus.com [86.145.157.83]) by mail3.uklinux.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79CDC40A581 for ; Sat, 13 Jan 2007 23:09:02 +0000 (UTC) Original-Received: from laruns (laruns [127.0.0.1]) by laruns (Postfix) with ESMTP id E50866F70B for ; Sat, 13 Jan 2007 23:08:52 +0000 (GMT) Original-To: guile-devel@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <87k5zqimya.fsf@zip.com.au> (Kevin Ryde's message of "Sun, 14 Jan 2007 09:25:17 +1100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:6423 Archived-At: Kevin Ryde writes: > How about making scm_set_program_arguments() available at the scheme > level too? As say > > (set-program-arguments lst) > > (without the "first" arg business of the C level). > > The C func is good for when you munch some options at the C level in > an scm_boot_guile, having it at the scheme level would be for the same > thing if do it in scheme instead. That sounds good to me. (I wondered about (set-program-arguments . lst) instead of (set-program-arguments lst), but I suspect cases where you already have a list in hand will be more common.) > + "Program arguments are held in a fluid and therefore have a\n" > + "separate value in each Guile thread.") That's surprising; why is that? (I appreciate this isn't part of your change though.) Regards, Neil _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel