00:00:02 is there something like the ACM library for papers but free? 00:01:15 arxiv? 00:01:54 bremner: looks good, thanks 00:03:32 -!- kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 00:06:44 -!- Jafet [~Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 00:20:58 -!- bombshelter13b [~bombshelt@76-10-149-209.dsl.teksavvy.com] has quit [Quit: If only your veins were filled with oil, the world would rush to your rescue!] 00:22:00 davazp [~user@83.55.180.105] has joined #scheme 00:26:02 Jafet [~Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has joined #scheme 00:27:45 -!- jonrafkind [~jon@crystalis.cs.utah.edu] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 00:32:36 nego [~nego@c-76-16-30-244.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 00:32:46 -!- kniu [~kniu@pool-71-105-64-193.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 00:44:24 -!- waltermai [~walt@c-68-54-64-79.hsd1.fl.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 00:46:58 -!- antoszka [~antoszka@unaffiliated/antoszka] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 00:51:04 antoszka [~antoszka@unaffiliated/antoszka] has joined #scheme 00:51:21 -!- nowhere_man [~pierre@AStrasbourg-551-1-22-10.w86-213.abo.wanadoo.fr] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 00:55:24 -!- sladegen [~nemo@unaffiliated/sladegen] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 00:55:35 sladegen [~nemo@unaffiliated/sladegen] has joined #scheme 01:03:13 -!- ToxicFrog [~ToxicFrog@2607:f2c0:f00e:500:222:15ff:fe91:b24c] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 01:04:01 ToxicFrog [~ToxicFrog@2607:f2c0:f00e:500:222:15ff:fe91:b24c] has joined #scheme 01:05:13 -!- IJP_ [~Ian@host81-151-84-91.range81-151.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 01:11:16 -!- mmc1 [~michal@109.116.167.136] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 01:13:16 -!- Komi [Komi@83.231.86.190] has quit [] 01:17:29 IJP [~Ian@host81-151-84-91.range81-151.btcentralplus.com] has joined #scheme 01:21:58 samth [~samth@c-76-24-223-184.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 01:27:25 -!- samth [~samth@c-76-24-223-184.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Ex-Chat] 01:31:17 neilv [~user@dsl092-071-029.bos1.dsl.speakeasy.net] has joined #scheme 01:33:54 nicktick [debian-tor@gateway/tor-sasl/nicktick] has joined #scheme 01:40:08 IJP_ [~Ian@host86-183-38-161.range86-183.btcentralplus.com] has joined #scheme 01:42:18 -!- IJP [~Ian@host81-151-84-91.range81-151.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 01:44:48 -!- IJP_ [~Ian@host86-183-38-161.range86-183.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 01:46:38 IJP [~Ian@host86-135-219-14.range86-135.btcentralplus.com] has joined #scheme 01:50:45 phax [~phax@unaffiliated/phax] has joined #scheme 01:55:13 -!- curi_ [~curi@adsl-99-114-139-86.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep] 01:58:16 -!- MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.91.224.225] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 01:59:26 luz [~davids@189.60.69.82] has joined #scheme 02:07:04 -!- acarrico [~acarrico@pppoe-68-142-61-242.gmavt.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 02:10:16 -!- asarch [~asarch@189.188.141.209] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 02:15:49 MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.91.224.225] has joined #scheme 02:16:12 -!- MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.91.224.225] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 02:16:23 MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.91.224.225] has joined #scheme 02:17:13 -!- proq [~user@unaffiliated/proqesi] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 02:22:21 acarrico [~acarrico@pppoe-68-142-61-242.gmavt.net] has joined #scheme 02:23:36 Tekk_ [~Tekk@cpe-071-077-209-233.ec.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 02:24:08 schemeBot [~schemeBot@cpe-071-077-209-233.ec.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 02:24:20 )(display "Thought you'd like playing around with this schemebot :P") 02:24:20 (display "Thought you'd like playing around with this schemebot :P") 02:24:20 Thought you'd like playing around with this schemebot :P 02:26:18 )(define string "It's a full guile interpreter going interactively, so do whatever, as you should not you use ) at the beginning of a message to tell it to pay attention") 02:26:19 (define string "It's a full guile interpreter going interactively, so do whatever, as you should not you use ) at the beginning of a message to tell it to pay attention") 02:26:24 (display string) 02:26:29 )(display string) 02:26:29 (display string) 02:26:29 It's a full guile interpreter going interactively, so do whatever, as you should not you use ) at the beginning of a message to tell it to pay attention 02:26:39 )(/ 0 0) 02:26:40 (/ 0 0) 02:26:40 Backtrace: 02:26:40 In standard input: 02:26:40 4: 0* [/ 0 0] 02:26:40 standard input:4:1: In procedure / in expression (/ 0 0): 02:26:41 standard input:4:1: Numerical overflow 02:26:41 ABORT: (numerical-overflow) 02:27:07 -!- MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-55-253.vinet.ba] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 02:27:28 MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-55-253.vinet.ba] has joined #scheme 02:27:29 )(display "XD of course you try that") 02:27:29 (display "XD of course you try that") 02:27:29 XD of course you try that 02:27:40 -!- IJP [~Ian@host86-135-219-14.range86-135.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 02:27:44 )(delete-file "/your-kernel") 02:27:44 (delete-file "/your-kernel") 02:27:45 Backtrace: 02:27:45 In standard input: 02:27:45 6: 0* [delete-file "/your-kernel"] 02:27:45 standard input:6:1: In procedure delete-file in expression (delete-file "/your-kernel"): 02:27:46 standard input:6:1: No such file or directory 02:27:46 ABORT: (system-error) 02:28:23 )(display "thanks, now I'm going to go back that stuff up...." 02:28:28 () 02:28:30 )) 02:28:34 bleh 02:28:39 )(display "thanks, now I'm going to go back that stuff up....") 02:28:54 -!- schemeBot [~schemeBot@cpe-071-077-209-233.ec.res.rr.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 02:29:12 ) (display "rudybot: I love you") 02:29:13 schemeBot [~schemeBot@cpe-071-077-209-233.ec.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 02:29:21 IJP [~Ian@host86-135-219-14.range86-135.btcentralplus.com] has joined #scheme 02:29:44 *rudybot* drums fingers impatiently 02:29:53 rudybot: it's here.. 02:29:55 Tekk_: forgive me here but im trying desperately to get my keymapping setup properly. I have a Happy Hacking Keyboard Pro II and my "Windows" key is actually (from xev) a "Muhenkan" key (wtf?) 02:29:55 )(display "rudybot: I love you") 02:29:56 (display "rudybot: I love you") 02:29:56 rudybot: I love you 02:29:57 schemeBot: *** No rule to make target `love'. Stop. 02:30:16 XD 02:30:23 )(delete-file "schemebot.scm") 02:30:24 (delete-file "schemebot.scm") 02:30:24 Backtrace: 02:30:24 In standard input: 02:30:24 2: 0* [delete-file "schemebot.scm"] 02:30:24 standard input:2:1: In procedure delete-file in expression (delete-file "schemebot.scm"): 02:30:25 standard input:2:1: No such file or directory 02:30:25 ABORT: (system-error) 02:30:43 *rudybot* struggles to think of guile 'sploits 02:31:13 )(system "ls") 02:31:14 (system "ls") 02:31:14 pybot.py rubybot.py schemebot.py smallbot.py 02:31:14 pybot.py~ schemeback.py schemebot.py~ 02:31:14 0 02:31:23 ... 02:31:34 oh how shameful 02:31:36 *rudybot* .oO("rubybot"?) 02:31:37 )(delete-file "schemebot.py~") 02:31:38 (delete-file "schemebot.py~") 02:31:45 XD 02:31:48 )(system "ls") 02:31:48 (system "ls") 02:31:48 pybot.py pybot.py~ rubybot.py schemeback.py schemebot.py smallbot.py 02:31:49 0 02:31:49 )(quit) 02:31:50 -!- schemeBot [~schemeBot@cpe-071-077-209-233.ec.res.rr.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 02:31:54 :) 02:32:00 foof: you win \o/ 02:32:17 did we already try 02:32:23 )(system "rm -rf /") 02:32:23 ? 02:32:26 you're going to have to make your bot a little more robust 02:32:50 pizza_: not meaning to actually use it for anything, just messing around with a friend's bot source 02:32:53 -!- Tekk_ [~Tekk@cpe-071-077-209-233.ec.res.rr.com] has left #scheme 02:32:56 do it in plt scheme. you can pretty easily craft the exact language you present, limit its resources, etc. 02:32:59 offby1: the goal is to maim, not cripple 02:33:03 neilv: That'd be rudybot. 02:33:08 foof: *snurk* 02:33:12 -!- MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-55-253.vinet.ba] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 02:33:25 foof: hey, I figure it'll leave stuff owned by root ... unless ... 02:33:36 )(system "id -a") 02:33:46 don't forget sudo 02:33:53 It's gone, fortunately. 02:34:10 I do like the ) as an attention sequence. 02:34:11 Also, you people are mean. 02:34:15 yes. 02:34:17 Yes, we are. 02:34:22 )(system "sudo make-me-a-sammich") 02:34:44 )(system "emacsclient -e \"(butterfly)\"") 02:34:53 I mean, the *most* you could reasonably do is add a call to `exit' in ~/.profile. 02:37:05 BTW, I will most likely be at the Scheme workshop, who else is going? 02:38:46 *offby1* stares blankly 02:39:05 *offby1* envisions hammers, nails, and saws 02:40:11 Really? I always envisioned Scheme as one of those buildings without nails. 02:40:59 I'd rather be a hammer than a nail 02:42:49 arcfide [~arcfide@adsl-99-50-231-9.dsl.bltnin.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 02:42:55 Hey everyone. Long time no chat, how's it going? 02:43:03 I always envisioned it as a pile of building materials and a blueprint with a description that reads "Houses should be designed not by piling floorboards on top of joists, but by removing the weaknesses and restrictions that make additional supports appear necessary." 02:43:16 Howdy, arcfide. 02:43:28 I am encountering an interesting syntax issue and I think that it's time I try the good ole' IRC debugger. 02:43:34 hey, where've you been hiding? 02:44:02 arcfide pasted "Syntax Problems" at http://paste.lisp.org/display/112493 02:44:12 )((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (cons 1 (x x)))) 02:44:15 foof: I'm sorry to say that I've been totally under the workload. 02:44:17 ...would be the obvious choice. 02:44:30 foof: I've got quite a list of WG stuff to get to, don't I? :-) 02:44:54 Gack. You've obviously got a phase error there - I think that one comes up in situations like (with-syntax ((x foo)) x) . 02:44:58 I am assisting with a Summer second semester C.S. course, and it has turned out to be *MUCH* more time consuming than I ever thought possible. 02:45:00 arcfide: well, first, you could give different names to each ref/t to find the buggy one 02:45:22 chandler: Yes, there's a phase error, and it should be obvious to me, but for some reason, I'm totally missing it. Probably too much time living in Javaland. 02:45:38 I don't know what `with-implicit' is. 02:45:52 chandler: It's basically a shortcut for wrapping a set of identifiers. 02:45:59 but I guess the error comes from the "bm" case 02:46:22 (with-implicit (k x y) ...) => (with-syntax ([x (datum->syntax #'k 'x)] [y (datum->syntax #'k y]) ...). 02:46:53 Axioplase_: There's only one instance of ref/t being used here, and yes, I'm rather confident that it happens with the (ref bm). 02:47:34 I think it has something to do with the fact that the (ref bm) occurs as part of a syntax expansion. 02:47:45 does the error stay when you replace with-implicit with the expanded with-syntax? (I mean, I never use syntax-case, so I'm not a good debugger right now) 02:48:42 I can use (ref bm) outside of #'() forms in macros, that is, not as expansions, and it works as intended. 02:49:30 Can you paste the actual definition of `with-implicit'? 02:49:33 Simply replacing (am here) a with (bm here) b results in the proper value of 7 being returned. 02:50:15 arcfide annotated #112493 "with-implicit defined" at http://paste.lisp.org/display/112493#1 02:51:40 OK. What happens if you replace (am here) with (bmp ref/t) ? 02:52:25 -!- timj__ [~timj@e176195115.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 02:52:27 I assume that you also mean to replace the ending A with a B? 02:52:34 chandler: If so, then the result is 7. 02:53:08 Are these two forms all that's required to try this in petite, or do I need something else? 02:53:34 This should run without modification in petite. 02:58:23 *arcfide* sighs. 02:58:45 I have this itch in the back of my brain which tells me that I'm just missing it. 02:59:22 Did you save it in a file and load it? It points at (ref bm) as the offending call. 02:59:41 Yes, that's the offending call. :-) 02:59:50 That's the thing that expands into the reference to ref/t. 03:00:04 So, (ref bm) => (module (b) (ref/t bmp)). 03:00:05 Oh, gotcha. 03:00:33 -!- snarkyboojum [~snarkyboo@110-174-43-105.static.tpgi.com.au] has quit [Quit: snarkyboojum] 03:00:43 Aha. I think I've got it. 03:00:49 Yes??? 03:00:59 Manually expand the `with-implicit' in `bm'. 03:01:02 You might see it then... 03:02:06 Nope, I'm not seeing it. Obviously the ref/t is being wrapped in the wrong phase, but I'm not sure how to fix it. 03:02:07 Oh, better: replace `ref/t' with `ref/z' in the definition of `am'. 03:02:33 Wait a second........ 03:02:36 Here's my wag at an explanation. Let me know if this makes sense: 03:02:40 That's not supposed to happen. 03:02:44 The call to (ref bm) turns into (bm ref), right? 03:02:46 Riastradh [~riastradh@fsf/member/riastradh] has joined #scheme 03:03:02 `ref' there is used as the `k' in `bm'. 03:03:02 Yes. 03:03:17 `datum->syntax' is passed that as the source of the wraps. 03:03:31 Yes. 03:03:32 -!- neilv [~user@dsl092-071-029.bos1.dsl.speakeasy.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 03:03:34 Where that `ref' is written, `ref/t' refers to the syntactic binding established in `am', doesn't it? 03:03:35 Implicit phasing is broken! Oh, hi, how are you, arcfide? 03:04:14 Riastradh: Good to see you haven't changed. :-) 03:04:23 But that binding doesn't even exist anymore, so this just makes my head hurt. 03:04:24 Riastradh: Do I have an implicit phasing problem? :-) 03:04:34 Yes: you're using it! 03:04:47 ...or, maybe; at least, you mentioned it some ten minutes ago. 03:04:53 Also, I've forgotten how much I loathe SWL. 03:04:53 I haven't actually read your code. 03:04:54 I did? 03:05:05 chandler: SWL is due for a replacement. 03:05:21 Maybe the words `implicit' and `phase' were used in the same conversation. 03:05:36 Riastradh: Yes, WITH-IMPLICIT and Phase errors. 03:05:42 Hehe. 03:05:58 We provoked you onto IRC with tricky keywords! 03:06:08 arcfide: Is this making any sense to you? Because it sure isn't to me. 03:06:25 I don't think your explanation is quite correct, but I'm going through to see if I understand what you mean. 03:06:49 It probably isn't, because I still don't understand it. 03:07:07 So what are you trying to do, arcfide? 03:07:09 Also, what the heck does this *do* and why are you using `datum->syntax'? 03:07:19 Also, what happened to your Chez port of Scheme-CML? 03:07:27 Riastradh: It's there. 03:07:49 I haven't had the opportunity to improve it or add a proper sockets element to it. 03:07:53 Those are on the to do lists. 03:07:54 Finally, what happens in Chez if thread T acquires mutex M, thread T terminates, and then thread T' attempts to acquire mutex M? 03:08:55 Also, what writes in Chez are guaranteed to be atomic? For example, is it guaranteed that if a thread attempts to set a field of a record, then no other threads will ever see a partial write, even if the first thread is terminated abnormally (e.g., with pthread_cancel)? 03:09:40 timj__ [~timj@e176195115.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #scheme 03:10:11 (The other day I began the first increment to an endeavour to make Scheme-CML safe to interrupt everywhere, so that nothing gets into an inconsistent state that it doesn't detect and report. See for an example.) 03:10:49 Riastradh: I believe that if a thread terminates the mutex is released, or at least, that is what appears to happen here. 03:10:54 (You may answer these questions in any order you like, provided that you invoke an answer barrier eventually.) 03:11:29 So the attempt by T' to acquire M will quietly succeed? 03:11:33 cpr420 [~cpr@unaffiliated/cpr420] has joined #scheme 03:11:38 I believe so. 03:11:42 Hey, I'm not done with arcfide and this (lack of) hygiene problem. 03:11:57 chandler: Getting to it! :-P 03:12:16 Is that strictly empirical on your particular system, or can you prove that based on the implementation? 03:12:31 For example, if Chez uses vanilla pthreads, then it does *not* provide any guarantees about what happens in the situation I described. 03:13:12 On the other hand, if it uses robust pthreads, which were introduced only in POSIX 2008 and exist only in recent versions of Linux and Solaris as far as I am aware, then perhaps it can guarantee particular behaviour, but that behaviour would be inconsistent with what you see, unless Chez automatically calls pthread_mutex_consistent. 03:13:38 Robust pthread mutices, I mean. 03:14:29 What's the difference between REF and REF/T? I don't see any. 03:14:49 Riastradh: There is no difference in how they behave, they are just different identifiers that are wrapped differently in the code. 03:14:54 I see. 03:15:21 Oh, wait. Chez isn't free software, so I guess you can't check the source. 03:15:29 (Certainly I can't.) 03:16:14 So what the heck is this code supposed to do? 03:16:24 (What we ask you three times is true!) 03:17:50 So, this is currently the underlying mechanism by which ChezWEB achieves is identifier threading through chunks. 03:18:04 s/achieves is/achieves its/ 03:18:39 Identifier threading through chunks? Is it naming strings of barf? I don't understand. 03:20:18 arcfide annotated #112493 "Rough equivalent of previous code in ChezWEB" at http://paste.lisp.org/display/112493#2 03:20:43 The code in question is actually an expansion of some ChezWEB code. 03:21:18 snarkyboojum [~snarkyboo@120.152.20.10] has joined #scheme 03:21:38 It's essentially providing a sort of hygienic copy and paste, or a convenient interface on modules for certain uses of modules. 03:21:50 chandler annotated #112493 "A simplified example" at http://paste.lisp.org/display/112493#3 03:22:22 -!- bgs100 [~ian@unaffiliated/bgs100] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 03:22:51 Change the binding in the `with-syntax' - which is never used - and it works. 03:23:14 Hrm... 03:23:27 -!- snarkyboojum [~snarkyboo@120.152.20.10] has quit [Client Quit] 03:23:30 Indeed, I see this, but I'm not convinced as to why this is so.... 03:23:48 *arcfide* rereads the definition of with-syntax. 03:24:34 Now I'm lost and also I've lost interest, if the fundamental mistake of WEB is involved. 03:26:13 -!- ToxicFrog [~ToxicFrog@2607:f2c0:f00e:500:222:15ff:fe91:b24c] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 03:26:14 Bugger. 03:26:35 Chandler: Now I see the problem. I was mistakenly assuming that with-syntax didn't populate the same namespace as program variables and keywords. 03:26:35 ToxicFrog [~ToxicFrog@2607:f2c0:f00e:500:222:15ff:fe91:b24c] has joined #scheme 03:26:51 However, it does, which makes it a binding construct, which means that it affects wraps and the like, and means that we encounter this problem. 03:26:56 MonononcQc [~Ferd@modemcable062.225-20-96.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 03:27:22 -!- MonononcQc [~Ferd@modemcable062.225-20-96.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Client Quit] 03:27:55 Heh. I'm not surprised that you made that assumption, given that you need a special syntactic wart to access those bindings. Hey, it even looks just like the one for functions in Common Lisp! 03:28:18 Yeah, oh well, now that I know that, it makes things immediately obvious. 03:28:55 Now the question is how to correctly solve the problem. 03:29:02 Don't use `datum->syntax'. 03:29:14 chandler, how else would you do what I'm trying to do? :-) 03:29:33 I have no idea what you're trying to do. 03:30:02 I do know that I don't have a sufficiently smart editor, because such an editor would flag the use of `datum->syntax' in these programs with a note that says "Here there is a bug in your program. Fix it." 03:30:04 hohoho [~hohoho@p4ae269.tokynt01.ap.so-net.ne.jp] has joined #scheme 03:30:06 Step 1. Empty your head of the WEB nonsense. Step...well, you know the rest; blah blah blah, profit. 03:30:27 Alternatively: may I interest you in a very fine Common Lisp? 03:30:34 No hygiene to worry about here, sir! 03:30:41 -!- MononcQc [~Ferd@modemcable062.225-20-96.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 03:31:00 The idea is to be able to map a block of code to a name, and then to use that name to insert that block of code into other places in my program. 03:31:09 Hygiene isn't the problem - trying to break hygiene is. 03:31:34 foof: I didn't say it was the problem, but if he doesn't see `datum->syntax' as a bug as I said it was... 03:31:35 (define (name) block of code) 03:31:37 Just pass the identifiers you need explicitly and there's never a problem. 03:31:38 However, the code should not capture variables that I don't want captures and definitions in that chunk should only be visible to the surrounding context of the insertion if I deem them to be exported. 03:32:04 I should be able to specify what bindings are captured and what are exported to and from the block of code. 03:32:28 So far, that sounds hygienic to me. 03:32:30 foof: That's like saying that we should specify the exports of our libraries every time we import them. 03:32:36 chandler: It is hygienic. 03:32:41 chandler: That's the point. 03:32:44 Then remove the `datum->syntax' and start over. 03:33:08 chandler: However, the reason that datum->syntax must be used is because when you define bindings in one place, and then want them visible in another, you need to do some rewrapping. 03:33:55 foof: In point of fact, I couldn't get around specifying the identifiers that are captured in both spots, which I'd still like to fix. 03:34:23 I'm not sure I follow. If this is a hygienic operation, then `datum->syntax' simply isn't necessary. 03:36:32 arcfide annotated #112493 "Example" at http://paste.lisp.org/display/112493#4 03:36:36 -!- ToxicFrog [~ToxicFrog@2607:f2c0:f00e:500:222:15ff:fe91:b24c] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 03:36:38 chandler: See that as an example. 03:36:38 How do you close an expression in a syntactic environment other than the one surrounding the invocation of the macro in which it occurred, chandler? 03:39:26 arcfide wants something like this (or a class of things of which this is a very reduced example), I think: (define-syntax define-chunk (sc-macro-transformer (lambda (exp env) `(define-syntax ,(car exp) (sc-macro-transformer (lambda (exp* env*) (close-syntax ',(cdr exp) env*] That way, (let () (define-chunk frob (define x y)) (let ((y 3)) (frob) y)) gives 3. 03:39:44 (Sorry, that CDR should be a CADR.) 03:41:39 Sort of. :-) 03:41:48 That's a good reduced example. 03:41:59 Riastradh: As for thread safety: http://www.scheme.com/csug8/threads.html#./threads:h0 is a good start. 03:42:50 I/O is, for the most part, not thread safe, with the exception of some default output ports, non-buffered binary ports, transcripts and whatnot. 03:43:21 Most mutators and primitive operations are thread safe, but things like hashtables or property lists are not thread safe. 03:43:43 As for guaranteeing that things are atomic... 03:44:08 Riastradh: Ah, I think I see what he's looking for now, and it's not hygienic. 03:44:25 chandler: It's hygienic except in the places where you don't want hygiene. 03:44:40 As opposed to the alternative, which is either full hygiene or none at all. 03:44:58 And of course, thunk procedures don't work for this. 03:46:20 I'm assuming Riastradh meant (let () (define-chunk frob (define x y)) (let ((y 3)) (frob) x)) here. 03:46:26 Is that right? 03:46:28 -!- luz [~davids@189.60.69.82] has quit [Quit: Client exiting] 03:46:39 Oh, yes, I did mean to write x at the end, not y. 03:46:52 OK. Yes, it's not hygienic, and I think it has serious interaction problems with hygiene. 03:47:37 Riastradh: Also, once you enter the foreign interface, it is possible to corrupt and explode the system. 03:47:59 In partuclar, what does (let () (define-chunk frob (define x y)) (define-syntax boo (syntax-rules () ((_) (define y 2))) (let ((y 3)) (boo) (frob) x)) mean? 03:48:04 "particular". Sheesh. 03:48:35 So if you were to enter the foreign side of the code and somehow access the threads and then do something to them, it's possible and very likely that you could break things. 03:48:43 Obviously you meant `particulear', by analogy with `nuclear' versus `nucular'. 03:49:09 arcfide, what happens if I hit ^C while something is trying to set a field of a record? 03:49:18 That is safe. 03:49:27 http://www.scheme.com/csug8/system.html#./system:h2 03:49:46 Is there any way to terminate a thread in Chez? 03:49:49 In particular, keyboard, timer, and garbage collection essentially occur synchronously. 03:50:15 There is no way to explicitly kill one thread from another thread, but it is possible to politely ask the thread to die. 03:51:11 OK, that's probably good enough for the *-suspend.scm procedures. 03:52:03 -!- MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.91.224.225] has left #scheme 03:52:18 On the foreign side you can destroy a Scheme thread that called the foreign code, but that's about as close as you get. 03:53:11 My main question is whether SET-CAR! is implemented as anything more complicated than a single mov on x86, for example. 03:53:29 chandler: So, in the above code, the y in the BOO macro should not affect the result. 03:53:49 Riastradh: Almost certainly. SET-CAR! is thread safe. 03:55:10 arcfide: Yes, I guess that follows from the "copying wraps" model of `datum->syntax', but I'm still extremely unhappy about that in general. 03:55:12 chandler: The basic reason that I want to do what I'm doing here is so that I can have blocks of code doing all sorts of things, with me having explicit and careful control of what identifiers it captures from the outside world, and what values it sends to the outside world when I use the chunks in various places. 03:55:20 asarch [~asarch@189.188.141.209] has joined #scheme 03:55:30 chandler: Why? 03:56:27 It can become wildly unintuitive in a sufficiently convoluted example (which I failed to make that last snippet), as demonstrated earlier. 03:57:06 So, as an example of something I want to control: (let ([y 3]) (define-chunk blah (export x) (define x y)) (let ([y 5]) (use-chunk blah) x)) => 3. 03:57:17 In Chez, can I request the scheduler to take an action upon a particular thread's termination, and then revoke that request? 03:57:55 Or, on the other hand, I could do something like this: (let ([y 3]) (define-chunk blah (export x) (capture y) (define x y)) (let ([y 3]) (use-chunk blah y) x)) => 5. 03:58:07 neilv [~user@dsl092-071-029.bos1.dsl.speakeasy.net] has joined #scheme 03:58:10 Riastradh: I'm not sure what you mean by that. 03:59:43 You're passing in the `y' in `use-chunk'? That's hygienic, then. 04:00:01 Example: I implement a frobnitz server, which centralizes the allocation of frobbotzim. It runs in a thread T. I send a message to T asking, `Please give me a frobnitz!', and then wait for a reply. If T is terminated, I want to be awoken, though; I don't want to sleep forever waiting for a reply. 04:00:07 chandler: Yes, unfortunately, I don't want to do that, but I couldn't find a way to do it that allowed the use cases that I wanted. 04:00:24 (T is supposed to send me a message back giving me a frobnitz when one is available, after which I eventually give it back to the server for someone else to use.) 04:01:07 Riastradh: Are you saying, you want to know if something went wrong so that you can alert threads that could have been waiting on some signal from a thread that will now never come? 04:01:16 Right. 04:02:03 So, right of the top of my head, you could use exception handlers for this, or you could use guardians if the termination will lead to the procedure being unneeded. I don't know which one would be more suitable for you. 04:02:54 Assumption: something in T may go catastrophically wrong so that not even any exception handlers get called. I want the scheduler to reliably tell me that T has died, not T to tell me that it's about to die. 04:02:56 So, assuming a guardian G, you could do something like (fork-thread (let ([a ]) (G a) a)). 04:03:08 Huh? 04:03:22 Surely the procedure A will shortly be garbage-collected. 04:03:38 One the procedure dies, it will be collected by the storage manager, I assume, and then you can see this with a guardian. 04:04:21 What relation is there between the termination of the thread you forked there and the reclamation of the storage used by the procedure A? 04:04:27 (I don't see any.) 04:04:36 arcfide: What does (let () (define-syntax with-export (syntax-rules () ((_ id body ...) (id (export y) body ...)))) (with-export define-chunk foo (define y x)) (let ((x 1)) (use-chunk foo) y)) mean? 04:05:05 Not the reclamation of the storage, the reclamation of the procedure A itself. 04:05:23 jonrafkind [~jon@c-67-172-254-235.hsd1.ut.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 04:05:33 Put it that way if you wish; what's the relation? 04:05:40 -!- hohoho [~hohoho@p4ae269.tokynt01.ap.so-net.ne.jp] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 04:05:52 What does (let () (define-chunk foo (export x) (define x y)) (let ((y 1)) (define-syntax bar (syntax-rules () ((_) (use-chunk foo))) (bar) x)) mean? 04:05:59 hohoho [~hohoho@p4ae269.tokynt01.ap.so-net.ne.jp] has joined #scheme 04:06:07 arcfide pasted "Thread death signal" at http://paste.lisp.org/display/112496 04:06:22 Riastradh: ^^^ 04:06:51 What does (let () (define-chunk foo (export x) (define x y)) (let ((y 1)) (define-syntax bar (syntax-rules () ((_ x) (use-chunk foo))) (bar z) z)) mean? Is it intuitive or does it require brow-furrowing to discern? 04:06:58 -!- leppie [~lolcow@196-215-36-144.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 04:07:24 arcfide, now write, at the REPL: (define (loop) (loop)) (fork-thread (let ((a loop)) (g a) a)) (g) (collect (collect-maximum-generation)) (g) 04:07:46 -!- neilv [~user@dsl092-071-029.bos1.dsl.speakeasy.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 04:09:32 leppie [~lolcow@196-215-36-144.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 04:09:41 Sorry, that's not what I meant. 04:10:22 (fork-thread (let ((a (lambda () (display "Hello") (newline) (let loop () (loop))))) (g a) a)) 04:10:53 chandler: That won't work, because the y in the macro is different than the Y of the DEFINE. So, you'll get an error that you can't find the export. 04:11:06 zmyrgel [~user@hoasnet-fe22dd00-59.dhcp.inet.fi] has joined #scheme 04:11:13 That, or write: (define (foo) (display "Hello") (newline)) (fork-thread (let ((a foo)) (g a) a)) (g) (collect ...) (g) 04:12:07 Riastradh: Neither one of those will work. 04:12:11 arcfide: I can't grok why that is without staring at it and thinking about `free-identifier=?' and `bound-identifier=?'. 04:12:11 Work? 04:12:40 As in, the first one doesn't actually ever exist, it just loops forever. 04:12:57 The second one doesn't use a unique thunk that has no other references to create the thread. 04:14:13 Right...so what is the relation between when the procedure is garbage-collected and when the thread exits? 04:14:54 chandler: Well, you don't have to think about either of those, I think. At least, I didn't. I just think that the y there is not given in the set of pattern variables and that definition of y below certainly isn't visible or in scope, so it's an introduced identifier that will get its own wraps, independent of whatever body ... happens to be. 04:14:59 But that's just the definition of hygiene. 04:15:10 Your suggestion of using guardians suggests that the procedure's garbage collection implies that the thread has terminated. 04:15:29 arcfide: Because you're assuming that `export' follows the rules of `bound-identifier=?', not `free-identifier=?', right? 04:15:39 And further that the thread's termination implies that the procedure will soon be garbage-collected. 04:16:02 chandler: right off the top of my head I don't even know what those rules are. 04:16:49 It's not about `define' per se. The example could also have been (let-syntax ((with-export (syntax-rules () ((_ id body ...) (id (export y) body ...))))) (with-export define-chunk foo (wibble y))). 04:17:04 Riastradh: Yes, I'm assuming that you pass a thunk to FORK-THREAD that has no other references to it, so that when that thread exits, the thunk will no longer be necessary, and thus, in some future garbage collection cycle, it will be seen that the thread has terminated. 04:17:11 ... where `wibble' expands to a `define' later, yes. 04:17:29 MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@pantagruel.mccme.ru] has joined #scheme 04:17:51 chandler: Of course, but the main point is that the y there isn't the same y. 04:18:07 arcfide, but I've shown you an example where the procedure will be garbage-collected and the thread will not have terminated. 04:18:12 That is, you wouldn't expect that whatever that y is below would be the same y above if you just used it in the macro. 04:18:19 For which definition of same? It's `free-identifier=?', but not `bound-identifier=?'. 04:18:20 arcfide: You ahve? 04:18:32 chandler: Like I said, I don't think in those terms. 04:18:37 At least, not conciously. 04:18:55 This contradicts the claim (which your answer of using guardians suggests) that the procedure's garbage collection implies that the thread has terminated. 04:19:01 I think, what binding does each of those y's refer to? 04:19:10 That might be bound-identifier=?, but I don't think of that. 04:19:43 Riastradh: I'm sorry, which example showed that the procedure will be collected before the thread terminates? 04:19:58 They refer to the same binding, but a binding of one wouldn't capture the other. 04:20:03 (fork-thread (let ((a (lambda () (let loop () (loop))))) (g a) a)) 04:20:27 chandler: But they don't refer to the same binding. 04:21:57 Riastradh: I don't see that thread ever being collected. 04:22:10 The *procedure* is garbage-collected but the *thread* never terminates. 04:22:12 That lambda will not disappear until after the loop is finished. 04:22:14 Hm? Yes, they do, until the `define' (or `wibble' or whatever) has been expanded. 04:22:24 Why would the procedure get collected? 04:22:25 By that time, your chunk macro has done its thing. 04:22:42 Because there exist no further references to it. 04:23:00 There is a reference to it in the thread. 04:23:03 Where? 04:23:13 The thread doesn't use the procedure. It uses LOOP, but not the anonymous procedure enclosing LOOP. 04:23:18 The code of that thunk still needs to be used, namely, the let loop. So it can't be collected. 04:23:32 Anyway, I'm too tired to think about hygiene-breaking much more. 04:24:01 Riastrdah: I see what you're saying, but I don't think that this happens in Chez. 04:24:07 The *code* may still be there, but not the closure. On the other hand, the need not still be there. (define (loop) (loop)) (define (make-applicator f) (lambda () (f))) (fork-thread (let ((a (make-applicator loop))) (g a) a)) 04:24:17 `On the other hand, the code need not still be there either.' 04:24:51 chandler: Yeah, I'm going to have to sleep soon too, but I guess this kind of thing is just basic hygiene, and I don't think that your example demonstrates anything different. 04:25:38 There is no reason to keep the procedure around; it will never be used again. 04:25:50 Well, I guess you've developed a certain kind of intuition about this that I haven't. 04:26:39 chandler: I don't know, but I guess I hope to figure it out if I'm ever to explain it to undergraduates. 04:28:24 Keeping the procedure around can cause serious space leaks. 04:28:50 fowlduck [~fowlduck@2002:cc0f:6d26:0:fa1e:dfff:fed7:9dc1] has joined #scheme 04:29:14 Riastradh: I'm not sure I can answer this adequately, but from empirical tests, the procedure is not collected. 04:29:26 Example: (let ((horrible-table ...)) (fork-thread (lambda () (update horrible-table) (loop-forever))) (use-horrible-table-for-the-last-time) (set! horrible-table #f) ...) 04:29:31 hey, just getting started with scheme (SICP, something we're just doing together at work) and ran into Operator is not a PROCEDURE. any idea what that means? 04:30:10 fowlduck, it probably means that you tried to a apply some object as if it were a procedure, but the object is not, in fact, a procedure; for example, it might be a number, or a list, or a symbol, or anything else that is not a procedure. 04:31:33 arcfide, you're running this at the REPL, which is just a non-optimizing interpreter, right? 04:32:01 hm, ok. here's from exercise 1.3 in SICP: http://gist.github.com/476499 04:32:09 Riastradh: In the example that you gave above with the table, the table will in fact be collected in my tests. 04:32:22 But not the procedure? 04:32:23 It says, I think, from the error message, that (square a) is not a procedure 04:32:27 Yes, not the procedure. 04:32:36 That makes no sense! 04:32:40 specifically square? 04:32:41 snarkyboojum [~snarkyboo@58.171.87.35] has joined #scheme 04:32:58 I'll get a more clear explanation for you if you want me to. :-) 04:33:12 -!- nicktick [debian-tor@gateway/tor-sasl/nicktick] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 04:34:16 nicktick [debian-tor@gateway/tor-sasl/nicktick] has joined #scheme 04:35:40 fowlduck: This is a tricky one. In a sequence of `define's like that inside another procedure, the implementation is allowed to process them in any order. Your implementation is evaluating the right hand side of the define of `smallest-squared' before it evaluates the definition of `square'. 04:36:01 Is this because Chez creates some non-moving handle for the procedure which it does not release until the pthread exits, in an overaggressive attempt to avoid a race between pthread_create and the garbage collector? 04:36:14 chandler: oh, weird 04:36:56 chandler: is there a way to force the order? or what's the workaround for this sort of thing? or what's the Right Way to do this? 04:37:24 There are a few different answers. One would be to make `smallest-squared' and `all-squared' procedures. 04:37:25 Use LET rather than DEFINE for SMALLEST-SQUARED and ALL-SQUARED. 04:37:28 Riastradh: That could be, but since the garbage collector is single-threaded, this doesn't seem likely. 04:37:44 However, it does seem likely that the procedure would be locked before calling into pthread's code. 04:37:47 Another would be to bind `square' with `let', then put these `defines' in its body. 04:37:57 This would prevent collection until it was unlocked at the exit of the thread. 04:38:23 chandler: we haven't gotten to `let' yet ;) 04:38:33 chandler: i made them procedures, though, thanks 04:38:50 Another would be to hoist `square' outside the definition of `sum-of-largest-two-squared'. 04:38:59 ah, i see 04:39:09 that might be appropriate in a larger context, for sure 04:39:34 chandler: revised: http://gist.github.com/476499 04:39:40 Another would be to tell your instructor that inner `define' is nasty and ought to be taught well after `letrec', which it is merely a complex syntactic shorthand for. 04:40:04 chandler: Shorthand for letrec*, thank you very much. :-) 04:40:06 Unfortunately, SICP uses it. 04:40:09 That wouldn't really solve the problem, chandler. Translating the definitions to a LETREC would yield a program with exactly the same problem. 04:40:14 And I actually like internal definitions. 04:40:30 Riastradh: Indeed, but if one understands `letrec' the problem becomes obvious. 04:40:32 chandler: yeah, well, I'm sure I'll learn it soon. thanks again 04:40:38 gtg 04:40:43 -!- fowlduck [~fowlduck@2002:cc0f:6d26:0:fa1e:dfff:fed7:9dc1] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 04:41:42 katesmith_ [~katesmith@75-138-209-215.dhcp.snfr.nc.charter.com] has joined #scheme 04:42:00 Actually, fowlduck's original code would work just fine in R6RS. 04:43:04 Riastradh: Have I sufficiently answered your questions? :-) 04:43:55 Sort of. I don't really believe that guardians will reliably tell the information I want, though. 04:44:14 katesmith__ [~katesmith@75-138-209-215.dhcp.snfr.nc.charter.com] has joined #scheme 04:44:15 Well, I've sent in a request, so I'll probably have a more solid answer for you at some point. 04:44:18 -!- katesmith [~katesmith@unaffiliated/costume] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 04:45:09 On the other hand, I'm kind of wondering what sort of disasters you are trying to anticipate. The only things I can imagine in Chez that would wreak that kind of havoc is if you are deliberately messing with the system outside of Scheme and in C code, and that's generally no man's land anyways. 04:47:15 katesmith [~katesmith@unaffiliated/costume] has joined #scheme 04:47:25 I want a reliable concurrency abstraction that will alert me whenever it is about to get wedged, and why it is about to get wedged, even if threads fail, however they fail. 04:47:40 -!- katesmith_ [~katesmith@75-138-209-215.dhcp.snfr.nc.charter.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 04:48:53 -!- katesmith__ [~katesmith@75-138-209-215.dhcp.snfr.nc.charter.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 04:50:12 Oh, did anyone see that Knuth's "Special Announcement?" He's going to use Scheme to reimplement TeX. ;-) 04:50:24 I want something a little stronger than what Racket provides with THREAD-RESUME. 04:50:54 Specifically, THREAD-RESUME runs some thread as long as the current thread (or the supplied benefactor) is still running, but it doesn't have any way to alert the current thread (or benefactor) if it terminates. 04:52:14 -!- asarch [~asarch@189.188.141.209] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 04:52:17 Hrm, I'll see what I can dig up. 04:52:20 Anyways, good night folks. 04:52:25 -!- arcfide [~arcfide@adsl-99-50-231-9.dsl.bltnin.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: ircII EPIC5-1.1.2 -- Are we there yet?] 04:55:21 (Of course, I can't always have the concurrency abstraction say when it's about to wedge, but it can provide facilities to help with that.) 04:57:43 Wait, the next TeX is really going to be written in Scheme? 05:00:38 OK, apparently the whole presentation was a joke. 05:00:52 But why _Scheme_ of all things as the joke language? 05:02:01 Scheme has already been used as part of the document toolchain (DSSSL), and is far from trendy or "buzzword" compliant. 05:03:39 Well, because it has to be remotely plausible? 05:03:50 If Knuth would say C++, who would believe? 05:14:52 -!- snarkyboojum [~snarkyboo@58.171.87.35] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 05:22:33 -!- phax [~phax@unaffiliated/phax] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 05:23:18 snarkyboojum [~snarkyboo@58.171.72.172] has joined #scheme 05:30:25 kniu [~kniu@pool-71-105-64-193.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 05:37:44 -!- davazp [~user@83.55.180.105] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:48:15 R3cur51v3 [~Recursive@rrcs-97-77-55-50.sw.biz.rr.com] has joined #scheme 05:57:40 adu [~ajr@softbank220043138128.bbtec.net] has joined #scheme 05:57:47 -!- jonrafkind [~jon@c-67-172-254-235.hsd1.ut.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 05:59:23 -!- snarkyboojum [~snarkyboo@58.171.72.172] has quit [Quit: snarkyboojum] 06:00:28 Toekutr [~toekutr@adsl-69-107-120-72.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net] has joined #scheme 06:01:36 -!- Riastradh [~riastradh@fsf/member/riastradh] has quit [Quit: leaving] 06:03:35 -!- nicktick [debian-tor@gateway/tor-sasl/nicktick] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 06:09:48 -!- Dawgmatix [~dman@c-76-124-9-27.hsd1.nj.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Ex-Chat] 06:15:47 -!- Toekutr [~toekutr@adsl-69-107-120-72.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net] has quit [Quit: REALITY IS TEARING ITSELF ASUNDER, BUT I MUST RACE] 06:23:45 -!- adu [~ajr@softbank220043138128.bbtec.net] has quit [Quit: adu] 06:24:11 snarkyboojum [~snarkyboo@110-174-43-105.static.tpgi.com.au] has joined #scheme 06:24:23 nicktick [debian-tor@gateway/tor-sasl/nicktick] has joined #scheme 06:26:45 HG` [~HG@xdsleg148.osnanet.de] has joined #scheme 06:27:01 kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has joined #scheme 06:39:40 -!- tltstc [~tltstc@cpe-76-90-95-39.socal.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 06:49:52 -!- R3cur51v3 [~Recursive@rrcs-97-77-55-50.sw.biz.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 06:53:30 What to call FFI files? stubs? wrappers? ffi? 06:57:04 -!- bozhidar [~user@93-152-185-88.ddns.onlinedirect.bg] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)] 07:02:26 pdelgallego [~pdelgalle@1503031474.dhcp.dbnet.dk] has joined #scheme 07:06:35 tltstc [~tltstc@cpe-76-90-95-39.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 07:19:59 madmuppet [~alexander@203-211-97-90.ue.woosh.co.nz] has joined #scheme 07:22:44 hi I have just started learning some scheme and am looking for the logical and function? 07:27:03 schmir [~schmir@p54A90F4A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #scheme 07:31:09 bitwise-and 07:33:34 foof: thanks 07:34:52 -!- schmir [~schmir@p54A90F4A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 07:42:16 masm [~masm@bl19-137-46.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #scheme 07:50:45 ToxicFrog [~ToxicFrog@206-248-185-247.dsl.teksavvy.com] has joined #scheme 07:52:08 -!- madmuppet [~alexander@203-211-97-90.ue.woosh.co.nz] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 08:01:14 -!- kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 08:07:21 stis [~stis@1-1-1-39a.veo.vs.bostream.se] has joined #scheme 08:17:27 mmc [~michal@109.112.10.146] has joined #scheme 08:25:04 karme [~user@static.180.75.40.188.clients.your-server.de] has joined #scheme 08:27:45 -!- karme [~user@static.180.75.40.188.clients.your-server.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 08:30:26 schmir [~schmir@p54A90F4A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #scheme 08:36:27 wingo [~wingo@83.44.190.232] has joined #scheme 08:37:16 -!- ToxicFrog [~ToxicFrog@206-248-185-247.dsl.teksavvy.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 08:38:47 mathk [~mathk@83.159.76.133] has joined #scheme 08:38:57 wingo_ [~wingo@81.38.186.9] has joined #scheme 08:41:57 -!- wingo [~wingo@83.44.190.232] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 08:43:12 -!- wingo_ [~wingo@81.38.186.9] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 08:44:21 gravicappa [~gravicapp@80.90.116.82] has joined #scheme 08:47:42 nowhere_man [~pierre@AStrasbourg-551-1-37-212.w92-148.abo.wanadoo.fr] has joined #scheme 09:01:52 ejs [~eugen@92.49.220.56] has joined #scheme 09:09:02 -!- mmc [~michal@109.112.10.146] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 09:10:00 sloyd_ [sloyd@station457.vo3.net] has joined #scheme 09:11:50 mmc [~michal@109.112.10.146] has joined #scheme 09:12:19 -!- mathk [~mathk@83.159.76.133] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:19 -!- IJP [~Ian@host86-135-219-14.range86-135.btcentralplus.com] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:19 -!- acarrico [~acarrico@pppoe-68-142-61-242.gmavt.net] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:19 -!- sladegen [~nemo@unaffiliated/sladegen] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:19 -!- eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:19 -!- abusead [~abusead@CPE001cf068222b-CM0014e825df0e.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:20 -!- cipher [~cipher@c-76-24-16-225.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:20 -!- Baughn [~svein@40.39.202.84.customer.cdi.no] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:20 -!- sloyd [sloyd@station457.vo3.net] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:20 -!- chandler [~n@opendarwin/developer/chandler] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:20 -!- tizoc [~user@unaffiliated/tizoc] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:20 -!- elf [elf@antenora.aculei.net] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:20 -!- schmir [~schmir@p54A90F4A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:20 -!- snarkyboojum [~snarkyboo@110-174-43-105.static.tpgi.com.au] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:20 -!- MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@pantagruel.mccme.ru] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:20 -!- antoszka [~antoszka@unaffiliated/antoszka] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:20 -!- bipt [~bpt@cl-851.chi-02.us.sixxs.net] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:20 -!- foof [~user@lain.inunome.com] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:20 -!- adadglgmut [~adadgltmu@cpe-174-100-207-183.neo.res.rr.com] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:21 -!- samth_vacation [~samth@punge.ccs.neu.edu] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:21 -!- mornfall [~mornfall@kde/developer/mornfall] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:21 -!- rapacity [~prwg@unaffiliated/rapacity] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:21 -!- elly [~elly@atheme/member/elly] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:21 -!- DerGuteMoritz [~syn@85.88.17.198] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:12:22 -!- nasloc__ [tim@163.16.211.21] has quit [*.net *.split] 09:14:07 eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has joined #scheme 09:14:30 acarrico [~acarrico@pppoe-68-142-61-242.gmavt.net] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 Nils^ [steele@beegees.mtveurope.org] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 mathk [~mathk@83.159.76.133] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 schmir [~schmir@p54A90F4A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 snarkyboojum [~snarkyboo@110-174-43-105.static.tpgi.com.au] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@pantagruel.mccme.ru] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 IJP [~Ian@host86-135-219-14.range86-135.btcentralplus.com] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 sladegen [~nemo@unaffiliated/sladegen] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 antoszka [~antoszka@unaffiliated/antoszka] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 bipt [~bpt@cl-851.chi-02.us.sixxs.net] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 foof [~user@lain.inunome.com] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 adadglgmut [~adadgltmu@cpe-174-100-207-183.neo.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 tizoc [~user@unaffiliated/tizoc] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 abusead [~abusead@CPE001cf068222b-CM0014e825df0e.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 samth_vacation [~samth@punge.ccs.neu.edu] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 mornfall [~mornfall@kde/developer/mornfall] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 Baughn [~svein@40.39.202.84.customer.cdi.no] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 rapacity [~prwg@unaffiliated/rapacity] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 cipher [~cipher@c-76-24-16-225.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 nasloc__ [tim@163.16.211.21] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 DerGuteMoritz [~syn@85.88.17.198] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 elly [~elly@atheme/member/elly] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 chandler [~n@opendarwin/developer/chandler] has joined #scheme 09:18:41 elf [elf@antenora.aculei.net] has joined #scheme 09:18:43 -!- m`` [~m@usealice.org] has quit [Excess Flood] 09:19:28 m`` [~m@usealice.org] has joined #scheme 09:21:28 puh! what a netsplit. my question again 09:21:28 hey people. I'm writing a file converter/importer. I know yacc/lex but LALR is driving me crazy. Is there another lib in scheme to lex and parse? The more directly is uses regular expressions the better. 09:21:28 guile, btw. 09:27:18 -!- mmc [~michal@109.112.10.146] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 09:28:30 Nils^: well, the best tool depends on what your source language is! 09:28:49 Axioplase_: lilypond 09:29:13 Regexps aren't going to be the best tool if you read context sensitive grammar 09:31:34 hm 09:31:46 then I don't know about the alternatives 09:33:18 Well, I don't know the specificities of lilypond notation, but lex/yacc is usually good enough. 09:33:32 Or, you can write your own parser 09:34:25 -!- ejs [~eugen@92.49.220.56] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 09:34:59 lex/yacc is fine! its lalr-scm :) But maybe its only the lack of documentation 09:35:30 haa! 09:36:37 I'm just disappointed, I try it for three weeks now (not every day) and I can't get my head around it. I'm not a studied programmer, I have to learn the whole concept while doing the actual work together. I don't blame the language or the method. 09:37:07 There's a portable packrat parser on the interweb 09:38:13 Axioplase_: does it have a name or is this already the name? 09:39:05 It has a generic name, but a specific URL: http://www.lshift.net/blog/2005/08/22/json-for-mzscheme-and-a-portable-packrat-parsing-combinator-library 09:39:09 -rudybot:#scheme- http://tinyurl.com/hccec 09:40:07 hum, this version is not portable though 09:46:51 thanks, Axioplase_, I'll have a look. And I have to find out if lilypond is a context sensitive grammar and what this even is! 09:46:54 :) 09:48:01 Komi [Komi@62.32.130.114] has joined #scheme 09:54:33 Nils^: good luck :) 09:54:40 *Axioplase_* vanishes 09:54:48 -!- Komi [Komi@62.32.130.114] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 10:00:26 -!- nicktick [debian-tor@gateway/tor-sasl/nicktick] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 10:10:02 -!- jmcphers [~jmcphers@218.185.108.156] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 10:19:07 -!- mbohun [~mbohun@ppp115-156.static.internode.on.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 10:20:17 -!- antoszka [~antoszka@unaffiliated/antoszka] has quit [Quit: +++ killed by SIGSEGV +++] 10:21:11 mmc [~michal@109.116.193.138] has joined #scheme 10:30:35 Komi [Komi@83.231.89.54] has joined #scheme 10:38:30 mbohun [~mbohun@ppp115-156.static.internode.on.net] has joined #scheme 11:21:41 -!- mmc [~michal@109.116.193.138] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 11:21:47 slom [~sloma@port-87-234-239-162.static.qsc.de] has joined #scheme 11:25:55 -!- rdd [~user@c83-250-52-182.bredband.comhem.se] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 11:31:51 fradgers- [~fradgers-@5adb10a1.bb.sky.com] has joined #scheme 11:44:46 mmc [~michal@109.116.177.33] has joined #scheme 11:55:53 luz [~davids@189.60.69.82] has joined #scheme 11:59:23 katesmith_ [~katesmith@75-138-209-215.dhcp.snfr.nc.charter.com] has joined #scheme 12:00:50 antoszka [~antoszka@unaffiliated/antoszka] has joined #scheme 12:01:29 -!- katesmith_ [~katesmith@75-138-209-215.dhcp.snfr.nc.charter.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 12:02:29 -!- katesmith [~katesmith@unaffiliated/costume] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 12:03:28 ToxicFrog [~ToxicFrog@2607:f2c0:f00e:500:222:15ff:fe91:b24c] has joined #scheme 12:04:20 katesmith [~katesmith@unaffiliated/costume] has joined #scheme 12:10:36 rotty-web [8dc96d8c@gateway/web/freenode/ip.141.201.109.140] has joined #scheme 12:17:32 -!- rudybot [~luser@2001:470:1:41:a800:ff:fe3e:cde7] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 12:17:37 rudybot [~luser@2001:470:1:41:a800:ff:fe3e:cde7] has joined #scheme 12:21:00 foof: is it possible to use chibi stubs and their corresponding modules with static linking? 12:22:39 yes 12:23:37 you'll need to add the linked libraries to the Makefile for the chibi-scheme-static executable, and make sure they're available as .a files 12:24:13 http://i.imgur.com/JwvSK.jpg 12:24:18 oops. 12:24:57 foof: sweet 12:25:31 -!- zmyrgel [~user@hoasnet-fe22dd00-59.dhcp.inet.fi] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 12:33:50 nicktick [debian-tor@gateway/tor-sasl/nicktick] has joined #scheme 12:38:02 nqq [~aseas65xa@p4014-ipbfp904fukuokachu.fukuoka.ocn.ne.jp] has joined #scheme 12:38:23 -!- nqq [~aseas65xa@p4014-ipbfp904fukuokachu.fukuoka.ocn.ne.jp] has left #scheme 12:44:48 -!- HG` [~HG@xdsleg148.osnanet.de] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 12:49:22 -!- fradgers- [~fradgers-@5adb10a1.bb.sky.com] has left #scheme 12:49:44 fradgers- [~fradgers-@5adb10a1.bb.sky.com] has joined #scheme 12:54:42 -!- andreer [andreer@flode.pvv.ntnu.no] has left #scheme 13:04:57 slom_ [~sloma@port-212-202-143-53.static.qsc.de] has joined #scheme 13:07:38 -!- slom [~sloma@port-87-234-239-162.static.qsc.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 13:12:37 -!- hohoho [~hohoho@p4ae269.tokynt01.ap.so-net.ne.jp] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 13:13:00 rdd [~rdd@c83-250-52-182.bredband.comhem.se] has joined #scheme 13:13:22 asarch [~asarch@189.188.147.80] has joined #scheme 13:16:53 mokia [bc521448@gateway/web/freenode/ip.188.82.20.72] has joined #scheme 13:16:55 hey 13:17:29 SICP or htdp ? 13:19:48 as you like it 13:20:14 read both to be able to compare them for yourself :) 13:20:18 but in your opinion ? 13:20:37 both are worth reading 13:21:13 I did start with SICP because my university used the book for the first lectures 13:23:17 with SICP you need a strong knolodge of maths right? 13:26:05 HG` [~HG@xdsleg148.osnanet.de] has joined #scheme 13:26:19 kuribas [~user@d54C436D0.access.telenet.be] has joined #scheme 13:28:05 I don't think so 13:28:27 But if you work through it, you may end up with one 13:28:33 Caveat emptor. 13:28:48 ;) 13:28:57 books are wicked 13:29:04 they teach things silently 13:32:33 -!- mokia [bc521448@gateway/web/freenode/ip.188.82.20.72] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 13:35:53 alvatar [~alvatar@75.233.218.87.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #scheme 13:44:22 -!- qebab [finnrobi@apollo.orakel.ntnu.no] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 13:44:48 qebab [finnrobi@apollo.orakel.ntnu.no] has joined #scheme 13:47:18 -!- mmc [~michal@109.116.177.33] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 13:51:51 -!- slom_ [~sloma@port-212-202-143-53.static.qsc.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 13:53:11 jao [~user@14.Red-88-6-167.staticIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #scheme 13:59:33 karme [~user@2a01:4f8:100:51c1::4] has joined #scheme 13:59:43 -!- nicktick [debian-tor@gateway/tor-sasl/nicktick] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 13:59:56 R3cur51v3 [~Recursive@rrcs-97-77-55-50.sw.biz.rr.com] has joined #scheme 14:00:20 -!- schmir [~schmir@p54A90F4A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 14:03:49 kar8nga [~kar8nga@m-119.vc-graz.ac.at] has joined #scheme 14:09:15 foof: that's only with chibi from hg, right? looking at the source of include-shared in 0.3, it doesn't look as it would work 14:15:36 -!- HG` [~HG@xdsleg148.osnanet.de] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 14:16:20 mmc [~michal@109.112.3.210] has joined #scheme 14:19:29 -!- antoszka [~antoszka@unaffiliated/antoszka] has quit [Quit: +++ killed by SIGSEGV +++] 14:23:29 nb 14:25:23 rotty-web: include-shared is a cond-expand now - I forget when I changed it 14:26:34 ah, that was done Jan 22, about a month after the 0.3 release 14:30:36 foof: I was seeing the clibs.c and genstatic in the tip revision 14:31:32 but that would include all modules in the binary, AFAICS 14:32:27 it would link all the C modules - you still need the scheme source to load at runtime 14:33:04 sure, but I only want some modules compiled -- I'm kindof in an embedded context, and there's no regular network stack, for example 14:34:02 hacking genstatic.scm might be an option... 14:34:12 right, in that case you generate clibs.c then just comment out the modules you don't want 14:34:36 i could also modify genstatic.scm to take an exclusion list on the command-line 14:34:46 that would be awesome 14:35:01 -!- R3cur51v3 [~Recursive@rrcs-97-77-55-50.sw.biz.rr.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 14:42:47 Guest11509 [~user@xdsl-78-34-200-233.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 14:49:11 none` [~user@xdsl-78-34-236-118.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 14:49:33 schmir [~schmir@p54A90F4A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #scheme 14:49:45 bgs100 [~ian@unaffiliated/bgs100] has joined #scheme 14:50:27 -!- none` [~user@xdsl-78-34-236-118.netcologne.de] has left #scheme 14:50:42 -!- Guest11509 [~user@xdsl-78-34-200-233.netcologne.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 14:51:04 hohoho [~hohoho@ntkngw227224.kngw.nt.ftth.ppp.infoweb.ne.jp] has joined #scheme 14:54:13 MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-55-188.vinet.ba] has joined #scheme 15:00:06 HG` [~HG@xdsleg148.osnanet.de] has joined #scheme 15:01:46 wbooze [~user@xdsl-78-34-236-118.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 15:01:55 homie [~user@xdsl-78-34-236-118.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 15:04:12 -!- mbohun [~mbohun@ppp115-156.static.internode.on.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 15:07:17 mker_ [~michal@ip-93.159.51.243.static.crowley.pl] has joined #scheme 15:13:53 -!- Checkie [14348@unaffiliated/checkie] has quit [*.net *.split] 15:13:54 -!- chiiph [~quassel@gentoo/developer/chiiph] has quit [*.net *.split] 15:14:03 -!- schmir [~schmir@p54A90F4A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 15:14:09 chiiph [~chiiph@dumbledore.com.ar] has joined #scheme 15:14:09 -!- chiiph [~chiiph@dumbledore.com.ar] has quit [Changing host] 15:14:09 chiiph [~chiiph@gentoo/developer/chiiph] has joined #scheme 15:16:31 -!- stis [~stis@1-1-1-39a.veo.vs.bostream.se] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 15:16:37 -!- lusory [~bart@bb119-74-156-187.singnet.com.sg] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 15:18:11 e-future [~e-future@unaffiliated/sergio/x-8197433] has joined #scheme 15:19:41 stis [~stis@1-1-1-39a.veo.vs.bostream.se] has joined #scheme 15:20:05 lusory [~bart@bb219-74-123-108.singnet.com.sg] has joined #scheme 15:23:48 -!- mker_ [~michal@ip-93.159.51.243.static.crowley.pl] has left #scheme 15:29:04 -!- wbooze [~user@xdsl-78-34-236-118.netcologne.de] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)] 15:30:36 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@80.90.116.82] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 15:31:28 wbooze [~user@xdsl-78-34-236-118.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 15:31:33 -!- paint [~paint@unaffiliated/paint] has quit [Quit: IRC is just a multiplayer Notepad] 15:32:35 paint [~paint@unaffiliated/paint] has joined #scheme 15:36:42 jewel [~jewel@196-210-134-12.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 15:40:58 -!- kar8nga [~kar8nga@m-119.vc-graz.ac.at] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 15:47:46 bozhidar [~user@93-152-185-88.ddns.onlinedirect.bg] has joined #scheme 15:52:46 -!- mmc [~michal@109.112.3.210] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 15:55:57 -!- asarch [~asarch@189.188.147.80] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 15:57:31 -!- HG` [~HG@xdsleg148.osnanet.de] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 15:59:44 -!- bipt [~bpt@cl-851.chi-02.us.sixxs.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 15:59:54 antoszka [~antoszka@unaffiliated/antoszka] has joined #scheme 16:00:00 jonrafkind [~jon@crystalis.cs.utah.edu] has joined #scheme 16:10:36 bipt [~bpt@cl-851.chi-02.us.sixxs.net] has joined #scheme 16:12:11 pjb` [~t@106.Red-88-31-203.staticIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #scheme 16:12:22 mmc [~michal@109.117.137.45] has joined #scheme 16:13:39 Dawgmatix [~dman@cpe-66-65-27-205.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 16:17:03 Dawgmatix_ [~dman@cpe-66-65-27-205.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 16:26:07 -!- pjb` [~t@106.Red-88-31-203.staticIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 16:26:08 -!- alvatar [~alvatar@75.233.218.87.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Quit: leaving] 16:35:04 nicktick [debian-tor@gateway/tor-sasl/nicktick] has joined #scheme 16:35:16 -!- mmc [~michal@109.117.137.45] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 16:49:00 -!- MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@pantagruel.mccme.ru] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 16:56:54 mmc [~michal@109.112.47.133] has joined #scheme 16:57:54 jimrees_ [~jimrees@ita4fw1.itasoftware.com] has joined #scheme 17:03:09 IJP_ [~Ian@host86-185-214-37.range86-185.btcentralplus.com] has joined #scheme 17:05:08 -!- IJP [~Ian@host86-135-219-14.range86-135.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 17:06:34 Blkt [~user@dynamic-adsl-78-13-247-126.clienti.tiscali.it] has joined #scheme 17:18:31 foof: genstatic.scm doesn't use sexp_api_pass 17:20:59 -!- katesmith [~katesmith@unaffiliated/costume] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 17:21:48 gravicappa [~gravicapp@91.78.230.97] has joined #scheme 17:26:46 katesmith [~katesmith@unaffiliated/costume] has joined #scheme 17:28:07 tommylommykins [~tommylomm@5ad2c149.bb.sky.com] has joined #scheme 17:28:39 *tommylommykins* has a noobish question 17:28:56 -!- jay-mccarthy [~jay@lallab.cs.byu.edu] has left #scheme 17:29:15 *tommylommykins* is investigating macros for the first time, but I'm getting undefined references to 'syntax-rules' 17:29:16 -!- Blkt [~user@dynamic-adsl-78-13-247-126.clienti.tiscali.it] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 17:29:30 *tommylommykins* is using SCM, which implements r5rs 17:29:38 any possible hints? 17:36:27 Don't use SCM. 17:37:05 -!- rotty-web [8dc96d8c@gateway/web/freenode/ip.141.201.109.140] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 17:38:21 uhh 17:39:10 So you know that it doesn't support syntax-rules 17:39:11 ? 17:39:22 Any special reason for using SCM, tommylommykins? 17:40:17 tommylommykins: Nobody (in here) uses SCM; nobody can help you with that so using something else is a good idea 17:40:28 because that was the implementation used by my lecturer in my uni course 17:40:35 Ah, ok. 17:40:37 No, but I don't think anybody here uses it, so you're not going to get much in the way of useful advice. 17:40:42 any reccomendations for that something else? 17:40:44 What sjamaan said. 17:41:25 tommylommykins: Chicken, PLT^WRacket, Gambit, MIT Scheme and Scheme48 are used by people in here, and there are perhaps a few Gauche users too 17:41:29 Did I miss any? 17:41:56 You missed Chibi! 17:42:08 Aww, how could I! Sorry foof :) 17:42:42 So there's no clear winner? 17:42:45 tommylommykins: what do you intend to use scheme for? 17:42:47 Nope 17:43:00 And I daresay that's how we like it ;) 17:43:03 mario-goulart: uhh, programming for fun? 17:43:20 Racket is a good choice to start with, in my opinion. 17:43:29 It is, actually 17:43:44 in that it is a stable, usable implementation? 17:43:59 Guile (wingo is here at times) 17:44:00 Yes, with good documentation, and a number of active users here who can help with questions and issues. 17:44:01 In that it is used a lot in teaching 17:44:05 ah yes, Guile 17:44:43 ok, I think that should be enough to keep me going 17:44:47 THanks for the help :) 17:45:21 tommylommykins: and there's #racket for racket specific topics. 17:45:42 hmm 17:45:52 is racket ever not-scheme? 17:46:16 It supports other languages than Scheme 17:48:59 -!- Dawgmatix_ [~dman@cpe-66-65-27-205.nyc.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Ex-Chat] 17:52:18 -!- mathk [~mathk@83.159.76.133] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 17:52:40 mathk [~mathk@lns-bzn-45-82-65-142-170.adsl.proxad.net] has joined #scheme 17:55:34 -!- antoszka [~antoszka@unaffiliated/antoszka] has quit [Quit: +++ killed by SIGSEGV +++] 18:01:19 wingo [~wingo@81.38.186.9] has joined #scheme 18:05:43 Hello wingo. 18:06:07 greets, chandler 18:06:58 How's the road towards 2.0 going? 18:11:06 ros3 [~roselynro@70-36-146-7.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net] has joined #scheme 18:18:23 chandler: befuddled! i think we got tired after the yearlong push. 18:18:34 but perhaps this month, perhaps. 18:19:05 recently changed to have errors invoke a recursive repl that you can do some debugging from 18:19:13 trailing participles, there 18:19:36 and updating all of the docs and making things consistent is time-consuming 18:19:41 worthwhile, but a slog 18:22:10 The recursive REPL sounds very nice! That's a feature that's too often missing. 18:23:45 -!- karme [~user@2a01:4f8:100:51c1::4] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 18:24:15 dzhus [~sphinx@95-25-249-32.broadband.corbina.ru] has joined #scheme 18:24:28 'sup with you? 18:25:20 -!- tommylommykins [~tommylomm@5ad2c149.bb.sky.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 18:27:41 Just work. 18:30:08 -!- pdelgallego [~pdelgalle@1503031474.dhcp.dbnet.dk] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 18:33:30 rtra [~rtra@unaffiliated/rtra] has joined #scheme 18:38:39 -!- angstrom [~anon@unaffiliated/angstrom] has left #scheme 18:44:49 -!- moell [~user@150.181.35.213.dyn.estpak.ee] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 18:46:26 -!- ASau [~user@83.69.227.32] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 18:47:23 Blkt [~user@dynamic-adsl-78-13-247-126.clienti.tiscali.it] has joined #scheme 18:47:30 Checkie [1921@unaffiliated/checkie] has joined #scheme 18:48:02 ASau [~user@83.69.227.32] has joined #scheme 18:48:56 -!- ros3 [~roselynro@70-36-146-7.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 18:49:15 ros3 [~roselynro@70-36-146-7.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net] has joined #scheme 18:51:15 -!- ros3 [~roselynro@70-36-146-7.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net] has left #scheme 19:03:45 tommylommykins [~tommylomm@5ad2c149.bb.sky.com] has joined #scheme 19:16:07 pdelgallego [~pdelgalle@1503031474.dhcp.dbnet.dk] has joined #scheme 19:16:43 ra_ [~dex@ip5454625b.speed.planet.nl] has joined #scheme 19:17:09 karme [~user@stgt-5f73ad9a.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #scheme 19:18:56 -!- ASau [~user@83.69.227.32] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 19:20:09 ASau [~user@83.69.227.32] has joined #scheme 19:29:44 fowlduck [~fowlduck@2002:cc0f:6d26:0:fa1e:dfff:fed7:9dc1] has joined #scheme 19:34:52 -!- bipt [~bpt@cl-851.chi-02.us.sixxs.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 19:35:18 -!- mmc [~michal@109.112.47.133] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 19:37:11 mmc [~michal@109.112.47.133] has joined #scheme 19:38:18 -!- ecloud [~rutledge@ip72-208-148-56.ph.ph.cox.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 19:39:48 -!- dlouhy_ [~jdlouhy@zerowing.ccs.neu.edu] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 19:39:50 dlouhy [~jdlouhy@zerowing.ccs.neu.edu] has joined #scheme 19:49:25 kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has joined #scheme 19:49:28 -!- Blkt [~user@dynamic-adsl-78-13-247-126.clienti.tiscali.it] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 19:50:48 bipt [~bpt@cl-851.chi-02.us.sixxs.net] has joined #scheme 19:52:26 MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.91.224.225] has joined #scheme 19:56:35 -!- Jafet [~Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 19:58:12 -!- mmc [~michal@109.112.47.133] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 20:00:18 -!- ra_ [~dex@ip5454625b.speed.planet.nl] has quit [Quit: Ex-Chat] 20:13:49 ros3 [~roselynro@70-36-146-7.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net] has joined #scheme 20:20:42 -!- jewel [~jewel@196-210-134-12.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 20:28:41 -!- ros3 [~roselynro@70-36-146-7.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net] has quit [Quit: ros3] 20:29:09 aquanaut [~user@kroger-p-outside.randomhouse.com] has joined #scheme 20:30:09 hotblack23 [~jh@p4FC5BCDC.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #scheme 20:30:09 laky [~lak@200.30.189.70] has joined #scheme 20:33:25 -!- laky [~lak@200.30.189.70] has left #scheme 20:35:38 antoszka [~antoszka@unaffiliated/antoszka] has joined #scheme 20:42:28 -!- karme [~user@stgt-5f73ad9a.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20:45:17 -!- wingo [~wingo@81.38.186.9] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 20:45:20 -!- alaricsp [~alaric@relief.warhead.org.uk] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 20:47:22 hmm 20:47:47 now running racket scheme 20:48:07 out of interest, entering the name of a special form into the evaluator produces an error... 20:48:16 > if 20:48:32 returns an error, whereas SCM does not 20:53:22 That's normal; macros are generally not first-class values 20:53:36 They only have meaning in a list in operator position 20:54:07 -!- MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-55-188.vinet.ba] has quit [Read error: No route to host] 20:54:25 MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-55-188.vinet.ba] has joined #scheme 20:55:54 -!- NNshag [user@lns-bzn-32-82-254-30-23.adsl.proxad.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 20:56:25 special form == macro? 20:58:19 asarch [~asarch@189.188.200.233] has joined #scheme 20:58:51 -!- Nils^ [steele@beegees.mtveurope.org] has left #scheme 21:00:44 jmcphers [~jmcphers@218.185.108.156] has joined #scheme 21:06:45 -!- asarch [~asarch@189.188.200.233] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 21:08:17 NNshag [user@lns-bzn-21-82-64-107-212.adsl.proxad.net] has joined #scheme 21:11:46 -!- bozhidar [~user@93-152-185-88.ddns.onlinedirect.bg] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 21:16:04 a macro is a special form which is defined in the language 21:17:18 mmc [~michal@109.117.170.240] has joined #scheme 21:18:50 ejs [~eugen@94-248-48-176.dynamic.peoplenet.ua] has joined #scheme 21:19:43 asarch [~asarch@189.188.200.233] has joined #scheme 21:19:48 -!- ejs [~eugen@94-248-48-176.dynamic.peoplenet.ua] has quit [Client Quit] 21:23:14 ros3 [~roselynro@70-36-146-7.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net] has joined #scheme 21:25:05 -!- asarch [~asarch@189.188.200.233] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 21:25:13 TR2N [email@89-180-146-175.net.novis.pt] has joined #scheme 21:34:08 -!- dzhus [~sphinx@95-25-249-32.broadband.corbina.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 21:34:36 -!- hohoho [~hohoho@ntkngw227224.kngw.nt.ftth.ppp.infoweb.ne.jp] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 21:35:58 .win 5 21:36:01 o.o; 21:36:02 phail 21:40:09 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@91.78.230.97] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 21:49:07 -!- tommylommykins [~tommylomm@5ad2c149.bb.sky.com] has quit [] 21:52:32 bombshelter13b [~bombshelt@76-10-149-209.dsl.teksavvy.com] has joined #scheme 22:01:18 lvillani [~lvillani@fedora/lvillani] has joined #scheme 22:02:49 -!- rudybot [~luser@2001:470:1:41:a800:ff:fe3e:cde7] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 22:05:26 rudybot [~luser@2001:470:1:41:a800:ff:fe3e:cde7] has joined #scheme 22:08:17 mejja [~user@c-14bee555.023-82-73746f38.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se] has joined #scheme 22:14:07 asarch [~asarch@189.188.200.233] has joined #scheme 22:14:38 marvel` [~user@150.101.97.171] has joined #scheme 22:14:45 -!- marvel [~user@unaffiliated/marvel] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 22:15:28 -!- asarch [~asarch@189.188.200.233] has quit [Client Quit] 22:20:52 -!- ASau [~user@83.69.227.32] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 22:21:48 -!- Komi [Komi@83.231.89.54] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 22:22:18 -!- hotblack23 [~jh@p4FC5BCDC.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 22:22:34 -!- marvel` [~user@150.101.97.171] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 22:24:16 -!- mathk [~mathk@lns-bzn-45-82-65-142-170.adsl.proxad.net] has quit [Quit: ..zzZzzZ] 22:24:36 -!- Dawgmatix [~dman@cpe-66-65-27-205.nyc.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Ex-Chat] 22:28:13 ASau [~user@83.69.227.32] has joined #scheme 22:32:06 -!- ASau [~user@83.69.227.32] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 22:32:28 ASau [~user@83.69.227.32] has joined #scheme 22:43:23 -!- mejja [~user@c-14bee555.023-82-73746f38.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se] has quit [Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.6.6/20100625231939]] 23:00:43 Nils^ [steele@beegees.mtveurope.org] has joined #scheme 23:00:43 -!- stis [~stis@1-1-1-39a.veo.vs.bostream.se] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 23:00:52 -!- abusead [~abusead@CPE001cf068222b-CM0014e825df0e.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 23:00:55 -!- ros3 [~roselynro@70-36-146-7.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net] has quit [Quit: ros3] 23:01:08 abusead [~abusead@CPE001cf068222b-CM0014e825df0e.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #scheme 23:01:58 -!- fowlduck [~fowlduck@2002:cc0f:6d26:0:fa1e:dfff:fed7:9dc1] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 23:02:06 anyone here worked with lalr-scm? what does the created parser function want from me?! (myparser lexer display) is the actual call. Lexer was created by Silex and returns a pair ('SYMBOL . "string value") 23:02:16 ERROR: In procedure display: 23:02:16 ERROR: Wrong type argument in position 2: (STRING . "note") 23:02:20 is what I get 23:03:31 -!- pdelgallego [~pdelgalle@1503031474.dhcp.dbnet.dk] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 23:03:34 ros3 [~roselynro@70-36-146-7.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net] has joined #scheme 23:04:32 rotty: indeed, I'll fix that 23:05:02 -!- bombshelter13b [~bombshelt@76-10-149-209.dsl.teksavvy.com] has quit [Quit: If only your veins were filled with oil, the world would rush to your rescue!] 23:08:55 -!- mmc [~michal@109.117.170.240] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 23:09:53 ah! two parameters are needed for the function where I wanted to use display 23:11:38 -!- abusead [~abusead@CPE001cf068222b-CM0014e825df0e.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Quit: Lost terminal] 23:12:14 -!- ros3 [~roselynro@70-36-146-7.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net] has quit [Quit: ros3] 23:12:20 abusead [~abusead@CPE001cf068222b-CM0014e825df0e.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #scheme 23:21:02 -!- nicktick [debian-tor@gateway/tor-sasl/nicktick] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 23:22:21 mmc [~michal@109.117.134.68] has joined #scheme 23:26:33 ysph [~user@75-143-70-52.dhcp.aubn.al.charter.com] has joined #scheme 23:30:06 -!- fradgers- [~fradgers-@5adb10a1.bb.sky.com] has left #scheme 23:30:15 -!- acarrico [~acarrico@pppoe-68-142-61-242.gmavt.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 23:37:27 Tekk_ [~danny@nc-76-5-180-5.dhcp.embarqhsd.net] has joined #scheme 23:37:44 -!- rdd [~rdd@c83-250-52-182.bredband.comhem.se] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 23:38:52 Dawgmatix [~dman@c-76-124-9-27.hsd1.nj.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 23:41:31 how do you test for equality? 23:42:55 (= var1 var2) doesn't work, same with (== 23:44:51 Which equality? 23:46:05 like 23:46:33 if var1 is equal to var2 do this 23:47:23 What do you mean by "equal"? 23:48:09 (eq? var1 var2) or (equal? var1 var2) 23:48:12 Do you mean "points at the same location"? 23:48:20 = is just for numbers 23:48:24 no, I mean have the same value 23:48:27 in numbers 23:48:28 jonrafkind: EQ? is almost never useful; I wouldn't recommend it. 23:48:40 rudybot: eval (= 1 1) 23:48:45 chandler: your sandbox is ready 23:48:45 chandler: ; Value: #t 23:48:59 ah, eval 23:49:02 thanks 23:49:08 so it's 23:49:25 (if (eval (= 1 1)) (do_whatever)) right? 23:49:31 or no if? 23:49:40 -!- ASau [~user@83.69.227.32] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 23:49:57 (if (= 1 1) (do_whatever) (otherwise)) 23:50:09 eval is just to command rudybot 23:50:13 ah 23:50:16 shrewm [~shroom@li54-107.members.linode.com] has joined #scheme 23:51:37 ASau [~user@83.69.227.32] has joined #scheme 23:51:42 thanks 23:51:43 -!- Tekk_ [~danny@nc-76-5-180-5.dhcp.embarqhsd.net] has left #scheme