From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Shann Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: More Guile 1.8 code failing in 2.x Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:07:23 +0000 Message-ID: <1361959643.2097.179.camel@debian-box.lan> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1361959657 23359 80.91.229.3 (27 Feb 2013 10:07:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:07:37 +0000 (UTC) To: guile-user@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 27 11:08:00 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-user@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 1UAdvZ-00021H-L4 for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:07:57 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48118 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UAdvE-0003N1-Mg for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 05:07:36 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:54536) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UAdv9-0003Mh-Vk for guile-user@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 05:07:33 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UAdv8-0006gX-RH for guile-user@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 05:07:31 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-ee0-f46.google.com ([74.125.83.46]:59056) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UAdv8-0006gE-L4 for guile-user@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 05:07:30 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-ee0-f46.google.com with SMTP id e49so290164eek.19 for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 02:07:29 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:x-proxyuser-ip:subject:from:to:content-type:date :message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding :x-gm-message-state; bh=4Z+TFiBW1100GfztJB2BKLMydIpwOps7I/ksLRsS5AM=; b=oAP2tXQWZCJ8+jknOFAa9CdVsHylUKYoZKClom5G7p+mruOz/qP6OdxgBSKCyZsJK2 EZVj0VEBIA11ZqG/cV9qPKCyLr3Q5In1ygyiMhR5/+JAtdUyurZbqlD3AajVa7N/CN10 zgboJ+jZJOtVi9P+6SDyJ1haQJrfofTAI6tmaJZn1DcZH3amFpjw14wyxvAGVqslMbhw NP3TVC+pjzHuDNQI1ubDlicVkiPh9EPPYEodIsdTXHHxYaY+PwSc6gOJXflgN/Ry0vtC DBarZQEzv82PhP3MrqgM77l0sSVUcrclUIy4tXBL5/la4DsTUBypiRU16n1MvlyeHCkO jVoQ== X-Received: by 10.15.34.198 with SMTP id e46mr4373585eev.27.1361959649715; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 02:07:29 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from (know-mailgateway-2.server.virginmedia.net. [62.254.26.101]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 46sm5555999eea.3.2013.02.27.02.07.27 (version=TLSv1.1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 27 Feb 2013 02:07:28 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from source ([146.90.136.35]) by smtp.virginmedia.com with SMTP; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:07:28 +0000 (GMT) X-ProxyUser-IP: 146.90.136.35 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmqK7hQ8eY018Kzm3cj9S9yYa2VaBU9gpTTYxhyD4VSkyHhlmLnyuL7sPt/W2n0q20NpYrx X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 74.125.83.46 X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:10142 Archived-At: We have one more construct being refused as we upgrade to guile 2.0 in GNU/Denemo (if (not (defined? 'ToggleTripleting::InsideTriplet)) (define ToggleTripleting::InsideTriplet #t)) It is intended to set up a flag which toggles between true and false on each call. If already set up, the flag is not altered. Apparently (I haven't been able to check) Guile 2.0 gives an error. #f definition in expression context, where definitions are not allowed, ((line . 2) (column . 4) (filename . #f)) (define ToggleTripleting::InsideTriplet #t) #f) Can anyone suggest what could replace that? I would prefer to to replace it with something that has the same semantics, rather than setting up some alternative method of handling the situation - registering all such variables on program startup, or some such - as at the moment this code only evaluated if used and doesn't require any mechanism to get initialized, other than this construct. Richard Shann