<daviid>sneek: later tell civodul, there must be a way do avoid these warnings though and I'd like to get rid of them <dsmith>civodul, I did eventually get an image built. <dsmith>Hmm. Just a minimal buildroot image with guile as the only additional target eats up 5.1G of disk to build. <civodul>dsmith: you should really use Guix for that ;-) <dsmith>Is there guix for beaglebone black? <civodul>but i mean it can be used to cross-compile userland software at least <civodul>though actually it may lack tweaks for ARM targets <ijp>but wait, there's more.... <civodul>in theory it can even make your life brighter <ijp><ijp> ,best-salespitch <fsbot> BILLY MAYS HERE, AND I'M HERE TO TELL YOU ABOUT THE MOST IMPORTANT PRODUCT I'VE EVER ENDORSED: EMACS. BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE, ORDER NOW, AND YOU'LL GET NOT ONE, NOT TWO, NOT THREE, BUT FOUR VIM EMULATION MODES FOR FREE! <ijp>there really are four, but not all come with emacs ***janneke` is now known as janneke
<ijp>the code will need a rewrite, but I think I solved my last problem with my hamts module <sneek>`cons' is a procedure in the (guile) module. <sneek>- Scheme Procedure: cons x y <sneek> Return a newly allocated pair whose car is X and whose cdr is Y. <sneek> The pair is guaranteed to be different (in the sense of `eq?') from <sneek> every previously existing object. <sneek>Did not find any object named `foo' <daviid>i've just noticed because I wanted to send a link -> guile-gnome-corba-types.c and a paste about a [very small] patch that I beleive is ok _but_ crashes the [corba] test suite. the patch is merely to call scm_make_vtable instead of scm_make_vtable_vtable. let me organize a paste anyway, i'd like some help if possible... <davexunit>Hi guilers. I have the following expression: (display-backtrace (make-stack #t) (current-error-port)) <davexunit>and it prints the backtrace I want... mostly. however, the top stack frame isthe call to (make-stack #t) and I would like it not to be there. <ijp>if you put a number after #t it will cut away that many frames <ijp>the whole make-stack api seems a little weird to me, but whatever <davexunit>ijp: oh, thanks. the documentation for make-stack confused me. <daviid>the NEWS file says: ... This may affect user code if you were defining a procedure using scm_c_make_subr rather scm_c_make_gsubr. The solution is to switch to use scm_c_make_gsubr... <daviid>can someone kindly explain what i should do :) ? <civodul>daviid: you should use scm_c_make_gsubr to define procedures <civodul>see scm_make_gsubr in libguile/deprecated.c <daviid>you mean i should use scm_c_define_gsubr right? <civodul>scm_c_define_gsubr is directly equivalent to the old scm_make_gsubr AFAICS <ijp>I'm writing an accessor function, which optionally takes a default to return if there is no such value. Which is more perspicuous: <ijp>1. pass in a (cons #f #f), check the return value with eqv?, and throw an error if we get back that cons <ijp>2. pass in a thunk as the default that calls error, and always call the result <daviid>civodul: yes, i've just seen the definition in deprecated.c, but new code should use scm_c_define_gsubr i guess so i'm going to change that too [in guile-gnome-corba-types.c] <ijp>in the past I've done both e.g. (pfds bbtrees) does the latter <ijp>hmm, (pfds psqs) does it the former way. hooray for consistency <daviid>can't find the definition for get-keyword <ijp>it's a goops function <ijp>or tags, or something <civodul>daviid: slight bug in the patch: should be scm_make_vtable (..., gsubr) <civodul>and use scm_from_latin1_string rather than scm_from_locale_string (more efficient) <ijp>so, I was trying to think of a way to test something that only happens when two hashes collide, and my first though was "how on earth am I going to find two values that collide?" <ijp>then it hit me: use f'ing const as the hash function ***george2 is now known as george2_
***george2_ is now known as george2
<daviid>(1) it did not need the (or (get-keyword ... #f)) I think. (2) I could rename type as class, but i choosed the oposite because of the error message, wdyt and (3) why the (let* (object servant ior), they are not used are they? <daviid>ot maybe gnome-corba-error is a 'non blocking' error, I guess so <daviid>civodul: it still fails corba test-suite: ../../build-aux/test-driver: line 107: 1306 Segmentation fault "$@" > $log_file 2>&1 <daviid>i would cope with 'wrapset.api failed with this test...' but segmentation fault is rather weird <daviid>ok, if I manually run the test-suite it's fine, something is wrong with exit-with-summary, maybe <daviid>the problem is I can not find any usefull info, test-suite.log just says 'FAIL', wrapset.log remains empty due to the segfault <daviid>civodul: i was wrong [my manual prep for launching the corba tests was not proper, now it is] and it segfault executing (run-all-defined-test-cases), what could i do to get more info? <ijp>does load hide exceptions? <ijp>also, is there an easy way to break on a locally defined procedure? <ijp>(note to self: it would be nice of ,foo gave help output when you don't add the right number of arguments) <ijp>well, then something funny is going on here <daviid>civodul: I did comment all lines related to *-vtable and it does not segfault anymore. are we sure that scm_make_vtable returns the same type [of what it makes] then scm_make_vtable_vtable ? <ijp>I think it has to do with top level values in compiled files, hmmmm <daviid>i think i badly expressed myself here: somehow, (1) one of the corba tests fails probably because vtable is not a struct-vtable anymore, and (2) that causes a segfault, which is another problem i guess