<davexunit>paroneayea: oh cool. that would be a good long-term goal. <davexunit>though not only would I have to write the parser, but also the org -> html converter <davexunit>paroneayea: having trouble finding the spec. do you know where it lives? <davexunit>spec is too big for me. anyone else want to write guile-org? :) <ijp>I started, but gave up <paroneayea>but you could look at the orgnode emacs lisp and see how it does things <bipt>davexunit, you could always run your scheme program under guile-emacs :) <paroneayea>I think I did the prefix stuff right this time, but I'm back in the same place where it's not compiling right at all and looping through a bunch of crazy gtk stuff <taylanub>GNU MLs seem to have a problem right now; mails don't arrive or so. <taylanub>a bug report I sent yesterday doesn't seem to have made it; persons from #hurd and #emacs complained about different MLs as well <wingo>so, gitorious.org/guile-jpeg now includes a decoder (!) <wingo>no idea where i'm going with that thing <wingo>next step is probably an encoder <wingo>seems to be straightforward, just have to do the same things in revers <daviid>hello guilers! hi wingo, sorry to spoil the fun, but i have to ping you for some goops support, pleaaase. getters, setters and accessors not working for subclasses is a terrible problem, even when writing small pieces of code, such as clutter examples... and also the patch that breaks guile-gnome ... if you could get some time to work on these 2 bugs, well you'll make my life a lot better :) many thanks! <taylanub>bug ML seems to be running again. (or are such long delays for acknowledgement emails normal?) <paroneayea>taylanub: there were some issues with the FSF mail servers this morning ***brieweb is now known as whatever
***whatever is now known as Guest27276
***Guest27276 is now known as whatwhatever
***whatwhatever is now known as tittytitty
***tittytitty is now known as brieweb
<pallagun>Has the guile-snarf changed from what is in the manual? or if there are extra options that I need to pass to it? I'm calling it but it's not producing the scm_c_define_gsubr that I'm expecting. Instead snarf seems to be spitting out some variable definitions without types? <sneek>pallagun, you have 1 message. <sneek>pallagun, dsmith-work says: Did you ever get your .so issue resolved? <pallagun>dsmith-work: yes. in my init function I specified a 'scm_c_define_gsubr("scm-name",1,0,0, function_name);'. I had a "SCM function_name(SCM input);" in my .h file and in my .c file I had "SCM function_with_typo(SCM input) {...}" - apparently this made things fail silently(I think?) when I tried to load the extension/so. <pallagun>sneek: tell later dsmith-work: yes. in my init function I specified a 'scm_c_define_gsubr("scm-name",1,0,0, function_name);'. I had a "SCM function_name(SCM input);" in my .h file and in my .c file I had "SCM function_with_typo(SCM input) {...}" - apparently this made things fail silently(I think?) when I tried to load the extension/so. <sneek>later, pallagun says: dsmith-work: yes. in my init function I specified a 'scm_c_define_gsubr("scm-name",1,0,0, function_name);'. I had a "SCM function_name(SCM input);" in my .h file and in my .c file I had "SCM function_with_typo(SCM input) {...}" - apparently this made things fail silently(I think?) when I tried to load the extension/so. <pallagun>hahah.... ok, well. I hope the message finds its way.