IRC channel logs


back to list of logs

<zRecursive>Where is the guile git repo ?
<zRecursive>davexunit: thanks
<nalaginrut>morning guilers~
<dje42>Why can't scm_to_stringn set string[len] = '\\0', regardless of whether a length pointer is provided?
<b4283>hi there, just was playing with the `read' function
<b4283>i just fouud out that it seems to have an expansion syntax, like #
<b4283>is this documented in the info ? because i can't find it
<civodul>Hello Guilers!
<nalaginrut>b4283: are you looking for this?
<b4283>nalaginrut: thx, maybe i misunderstood ...
*nalaginrut is wondering how hard to implement clisp in Guile...
<taylanub>nalaginrut: You mean CL (Common Lisp)? "Clisp" is the name of a specific CL implementation.
<nalaginrut>taylanub: yes, but it's better to run the clisp code either
<taylanub>nalaginrut: ?
<nalaginrut>maybe I got a wrong idea, but what I mean is to implement common lisp on Guile
<taylanub>oh, I was confused because you still said "clisp". when you use that word people will think you mean and not CL as a language
<nalaginrut>ah, another question, is it possible to replace clisp by guile-common-lisp? ;-P
<taylanub>I'm not sure how useful it would be to also try to support Common Lisp when we can just improve Scheme. die-hard CL fans who want to use CL for the sake of using CL (instead of the advantages of CL which one can realize in Scheme just as well) are a niche as far as I see
<taylanub>nalaginrut: you're still saying "clisp", please say "CL" when you mean Common Lisp :)
<nalaginrut>taylanub: no, the 'clisp' I said in my last sentence is Clisp as a compiler
<taylanub>oh, haha
<nalaginrut>yes, I think it's better to improve Scheme, but you know, Guile could be a generic compiler
<nalaginrut>hmm...high level VM
*nalaginrut think it's not proper to use VM since we may have AOT in the future
<taylanub>I see, that might be an interesting question, but there's already both Clisp and "GNU Common Lisp", and I'm guessing that both of these are relatively mature implementations which might not make sense to rebase on Guile...
<nalaginrut>there's a reason to think about it, if you implement common-lisp, you can write modules with it, and you can call it in your Scheme code
<nalaginrut>in principle, it's possible to use various languages to develop one project, with Guile
<nalaginrut>sounds like dot net
<taylanub>it would probably be more beneficial to concentrate on more popular languages first, like JS, Lua, Python
<taylanub>also, those languages have no GNU implementations at all yet
<nalaginrut>yes, it's true
<taylanub>anyway, we're just pipe dreaming here :)
<nalaginrut>everything begins from a dream ;-)
<ArneBab>…and continues someone who makes it real. So if there were someone who wanted to implement CL in guile, I’d say “if you think you can pull it off: go for it!”
<ArneBab>hi wingo
<nalaginrut>hi wingo
***Guest45182 is now known as aburgess
***fangism-ctrl-ZZZ is now known as fangism
<daviid>wingo: hello! I can't find guile-gnome individual binding library's versions that have been used for 2.16.2 (maybe we should do something about that, unless I misse something?): do you remember which glib version you used ?
<wingo>davexunit: no i don't remember; check the release notes for the gnome platform libraries 2.16
<daviid>NEWS doesn't mention any, neither git logs. Current stable is 2.40.0, I was asking to start to update step by step, but no big deal. maybe you have a manually /opt glib installed which could let us know...
<daviid>no worries though