From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Maciek Godek" Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: What happened to the infix module? Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2008 16:09:54 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87myjvio0u.fsf@ambire.localdomain> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1217686215 15799 80.91.229.12 (2 Aug 2008 14:10:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2008 14:10:15 +0000 (UTC) To: guile-user@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Aug 02 16:11:04 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-user@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KPHp1-0003FZ-Qn for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Sat, 02 Aug 2008 16:11:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41705 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KPHo7-0001YJ-58 for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Sat, 02 Aug 2008 10:10:07 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KPHnz-0001PO-0X for guile-user@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Aug 2008 10:09:59 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KPHnw-0001K4-9k for guile-user@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Aug 2008 10:09:57 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=49201 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KPHnv-0001Jl-Ti for guile-user@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Aug 2008 10:09:55 -0400 Original-Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com ([209.85.200.168]:56738) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KPHnv-000304-HL for guile-user@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Aug 2008 10:09:55 -0400 Original-Received: by wf-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 28so1354097wfc.24 for ; Sat, 02 Aug 2008 07:09:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=OUnolkpQlVFscqVw3uPi63Afb5mQMM1AbrwQqUFpic8=; b=iRzH789F0hRDqBoFjGIuxhDjGR48kd1d8TIG1MsCdqwgpmJlGn73Ot5OI63kYOtXD1 iZ+qGYKPfX/0JSxto32xkuK4WqzhZKKyQu3AJ6WdR5nDoOmT2Ouip1ujGjrz0wBLYF5d wevCtWLs+1yz0uiFp7nCz6GF4xVJcxR2Cv6x8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=P3ksNKpJPddfo3i8hE+APNNBIHQeBDd00/oRXU/IYgOgqwbHMUCVomcadRCSFy2uz8 s0shKoMnYxoSxV7O26/2ekvyWw/J+sNJXhbCEgSXY/l/PGW/aEOBPS+5ud4G5aUxMhDJ DabK6zXBzIzYe3AZpB3r19j4796OueSlfrmuU= Original-Received: by 10.142.49.4 with SMTP id w4mr4190999wfw.201.1217686194576; Sat, 02 Aug 2008 07:09:54 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.142.141.17 with HTTP; Sat, 2 Aug 2008 07:09:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87myjvio0u.fsf@ambire.localdomain> Content-Disposition: inline X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:6720 Archived-At: Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote: > () "Maciek Godek" > () Sat, 2 Aug 2008 14:10:24 +0200 > > http://gnuvola.org/software/guile/doc/Reading-Infix.html > Yet there's no such module in the repository. > What happened? > > Well, that documentation is for Guile 1.4.x, so you can find > that module where you can find Guile 1.4.x. In other words, > released: http://www.gnuvola.org/software/guile/ > wip: http://www.gnuvola.org/wip/ (g14) Oh, I finally have my chance to ask: why was the guile 1.4 fork created? was there too much software for that version of guile that would be difficult to adjust to the trunk? (or was it __better__ than the 1.6 and 1.8, that were assigned higher version numbers to cause the confusion?) thanks M.