From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Neil Jerram Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: language translator help Date: 18 May 2002 14:47:24 +0100 Sender: guile-user-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <15561.38014.967466.255795@segfault.bogus.domain> <15563.18078.788420.299836@segfault.bogus.domain> <87ofg4zkhp.fsf@becket.becket.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1021732055 10590 127.0.0.1 (18 May 2002 14:27:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 14:27:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-user@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 1795BG-0002kg-00 for ; Sat, 18 May 2002 16:27:35 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17957t-0001rw-00; Sat, 18 May 2002 10:24:05 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.uklinux.net ([80.84.72.21] helo=s1.uklinux.net) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 179576-0001q3-00 for ; Sat, 18 May 2002 10:23:16 -0400 Original-Received: from portalet.ossau.uklinux.net (dial-212-159-136-170.access.uk.tiscali.com [212.159.136.170]) by s1.uklinux.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g4IENBZ30059; Sat, 18 May 2002 15:23:12 +0100 Original-Received: from laruns.ossau.uklinux.net.ossau.uklinux.net (laruns.ossau.uklinux.net [192.168.1.3]) by portalet.ossau.uklinux.net (Postfix on SuSE Linux 7.2 (i386)) with ESMTP id 1154116D1; Sat, 18 May 2002 14:51:19 +0000 (GMT) Original-To: ttn@glug.org Original-Lines: 55 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 Errors-To: guile-user-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:455 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.user:455 >>>>> "thi" == Thien-Thi Nguyen writes: thi> From: Neil Jerram thi> Date: 28 Apr 2002 19:21:49 +0100 thi> What tools are now available for writing parsers in Scheme? Last time thi> we had this conversation on the list, ISTR that there were many ideas thi> but nothing quite complete. thi> ok, i've chosen this to be the "application test load" for thi> guile-1.4.2. why? because guile-lang-allover-0.1 needs to thi> install a private shared object library, which motivates thi> design of how to support that. this design can be used for thi> guile itself. Well, I was impressed by your NEWS list for 1.4.1, so perhaps your approach is good. And it will definitely be good to get guile-lang-allover working. BTW, is there any reason not to sync guile-lang-allover back up with the guile-rgx-ctax module? thi> in the process, libguilereadline and libqthreads will also be moved to thi> $prefix/lib/guile/1.4.2 -- the only thing in $prefix/lib will be thi> libguile -- and scheme bindings to lt_* will be introduced (where it thi> makes sense). this allows `load-extension' and ilk implementation thi> experimentation. On this point I'd really like to see consensus (w.r.t. 1.6.x and 1.8.x plans) before you proceed. thi> 1.4.2 also back-ports :select and :renamer, so it's a good thi> time to introduce the "user-defined interface" hook thi> mechanisms discussed (which is actually the original form the thi> :select and :renamer code when it was first posted), and thi> start closing the loop on not just loading sofiles but thi> building them too. (1.4.3 back-ports scripts/ too, including thi> yet to be written "build-guile-module".) thi> (fyi, first module built suchly will be guile-doc-snarf thi> backend.) Sounds nice, especially when compared with our ongoing failure to get a 1.6.x out the door. Important question, though: is it perhaps the case that you are only able to do this because you're running with 1.4.x on your own and with hindsight? In other words, do you think a similarly planned model could apply to bleeding edge development? thi> i will unsubscribe from guile-devel to protest its existence. thi> i don't believe in standing away from the users like that. Hmm. Even though you may be right that this division is bad (which is at least debatable), I don't see how you will achieve consensus on 1.4.x directions without being subscribed to guile-devel. So this is a bit too confrontational for my liking. Neil _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user