From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Sunjoong Lee Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: read-header procedure of (web http) module has a bug? Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 09:07:46 +0900 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6dab0e783493404be75aa37 X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1335312500 28796 80.91.229.3 (25 Apr 2012 00:08:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:08:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-user@gnu.org To: Noah Lavine Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 25 02:08:19 2012 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 1SMpmL-0004p0-IX for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Wed, 25 Apr 2012 02:08:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55869 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SMpmL-0007hm-3L for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 20:08:17 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:34610) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SMpmG-0007hD-9p for guile-user@gnu.org; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 20:08:13 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SMpmE-00007D-EZ for guile-user@gnu.org; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 20:08:11 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wg0-f49.google.com ([74.125.82.49]:36011) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SMpmE-00006z-5b for guile-user@gnu.org; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 20:08:10 -0400 Original-Received: by wgbds1 with SMTP id ds1so201714wgb.30 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 17:08:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=qEcsvehPVESAtPqOOjhi66WGVOSVjxhOxzVUjPKRdec=; b=NiuJRW3op8SbrAjs/Fk8Rkzmi7XMcTddTZBfpI4KJi+tQ/YhuQBoCiwTs/cxEArehZ 266ypP26aqVNwIia8V50h+pIl02/gnQj74mzsrYIjwngKKqBcGPmw7lX7ETRnkFsp+Fb n4dM6049D0rCp/nhoqenP0o6KMAgyhRuykN4zfRZv4bMatx6FqMBaVcpv914FrixzV6B 51r359guEff4R7gUgLa3LQetIUfJ8ZTY7VhJqMuftl3HRWtcUySNoiMMjtSx3R90vD0i 0GmYItVmbaW9DwGSkuv9YPMXk4m2WzCkeb5ZLUEXGMTC/yYje+g3GFkOP3+W8MPtwCwC NeZA== Original-Received: by 10.216.141.134 with SMTP id g6mr323147wej.12.1335312488024; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 17:08:08 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.223.93.206 with HTTP; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 17:07:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 74.125.82.49 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:9390 Archived-At: --0016e6dab0e783493404be75aa37 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 It's very pleasure to know something new. 2012/4/25 Noah Lavine > > Yes, that's right. And procedures at one level can always call to > procedures at a higher level, but not the other way around. I understood. > > I have another question; What if the macro case? > > Suppose there is a procedure to use another macro and definition of the > > macro is after the procedure, is it illegal? > > Good question. I don't know the answer to that. > I think it illegal; you know, I groused about the definition order of test-apply procedure and test-with-runner macro to Per. > Oh, another one; each procedure call of the same level is legal on other > > language like Chicken? I'm confused. > > Yes, I think this should be legal in all Scheme implementations, > including Guile and Chicken. > Very confused; I saw many compile errors and it disappeared after re-ordering definitions on Chicken. But this is not a Guile problem. > I hope this helps. > Very helpful and thank you again. --0016e6dab0e783493404be75aa37 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
It's very=C2=A0pleasure to know something ne= w.

2012/4/25 Noah Lavine <noah.b.l= avine@gmail.com>
Yes, that's right. And procedures at one level can always call to
procedures at a higher level, but not the other way around.

I understood.
=C2=A0
> I have another question; What if the macro case?
> Suppose there is a procedure to use another macro and definition of th= e
> macro is after the procedure, is it illegal?

Good question. I don't know the answer to that.
<= div>
I think it illegal; you know, I groused about the defini= tion order of=C2=A0test-apply procedure and=C2=A0test-with-runner macro to = Per.

> Oh, another one; each procedure call of the same level is legal on oth= er
> language like=C2=A0Chicken? I'm confused.

Yes, I think this should be legal in all Scheme implementations,
including Guile and Chicken.

Very confu= sed; I saw many compile errors and it disappeared after re-ordering definit= ions on=C2=A0Chicken.=C2=A0But this is not a Guile problem.
=C2= =A0
I hope this helps.

Very helpful and th= ank you again.
--0016e6dab0e783493404be75aa37--