From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Noah Lavine Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: SRFI-64 module and SRFI-78 module -- archive file attached Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 13:30:49 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87bolwmkmg.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1336843859 25854 80.91.229.3 (12 May 2012 17:30:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 17:30:59 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org To: Sunjoong Lee Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat May 12 19:30:58 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1STG9i-0004Yj-IS for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 May 2012 19:30:58 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34564 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1STG9h-0006hT-O1 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 May 2012 13:30:57 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:47650) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1STG9e-0006hC-5y for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 May 2012 13:30:55 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1STG9c-00020d-ER for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 May 2012 13:30:53 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-yx0-f169.google.com ([209.85.213.169]:58262) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1STG9c-00020X-7S for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 May 2012 13:30:52 -0400 Original-Received: by yenm7 with SMTP id m7so4280459yen.0 for ; Sat, 12 May 2012 10:30:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=beI4/GHwKFixBcPineH9la6WeW3DLgzwsEGUEN5AVvM=; b=pc13ghirBdcFQms2YSzLL57RXM96MyYAh0h3FkFw+CljLEJi6N5HTNVuXjfmHdLuHh /esb5ORomINLHd79geMkTogtLaaKaPlcIIE7wdxM2o/Kp6Cy8oKLbNZn0YPUf1KYuyA1 vNr5+R3RfnwStud3+1+oSDuFw3kZgEzcxuOD8Nnjjuz9ZsuI/Ym9bqe5hr+ZO88Eoesu ce7vaBEpFbZn5tSZnxCCUazONSNg3tn2km5slz+tTjUVxrFWO2+emHzyofjymL5vgRJi yUK0RAzsHAXN45KDYa676HIelnEnjV5TEKc7Y4H8Ac7lOVHG//hrKN93dj1tRjPuBRzV LlOQ== Original-Received: by 10.42.88.135 with SMTP id c7mr1029229icm.57.1336843849354; Sat, 12 May 2012 10:30:49 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.42.29.200 with HTTP; Sat, 12 May 2012 10:30:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87bolwmkmg.fsf@gmail.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: ynsgr4DVA5K--ArbWQYLp4HVYrE X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 209.85.213.169 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:14402 Archived-At: Hello, > I'd felt afraid of guile-devel@gnu.org because I'm just a newbie and a > poor enghlish reader/writer; especially of language problem. That's fine. I am sure that you will get used to it if you contribute a lot. > My goal? Hum... Like other people, I'd googled when I'd needed a test > suite. I'd heard the SRFI 64 and SRFI 78 but not been able to use it > then. So, I'd tried with unit-test in guile-lib. > > unit-test is good but my concern was abnormal case, i.e., error or > exception. unit-test supports assert-exception macro but I feel > insufficient when unexpected exception occur. So, I was back to SRFI 64 > and made it work on Guile. > > I think there are people googling for test suite like me. If Guile > include SRFI 64 in bundle, it would be helpful to them. Thanks for doing that! I have only read SRFI-64 yet, but I have a few comments. First of all, it would be nice you had tests for it. You might be able to use SRFI-64 to test itself, which would be cool. Second, since your changes add compatibility for several Scheme implementations, have you thought about trying to make them part of the reference implementation? You would probably have to email Per Bothner to ask him, but that might be the best way to make your changes available to all of the implementations you are making it for. If not, I hope Guile would like to have it, but I think you are targeting more than just Guile. Noah