[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: I don't want to maintain this

From: Bruce Korb
Subject: Re: I don't want to maintain this
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 06:00:54 -0800
User-agent: KMail/1.7.1

On Wednesday 30 November 2005 05:46 am, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Bruce Korb <address@hidden> writes:
> > Well, okay, I don't find the stuff obvious.  With effort, I'm sure
> > I could puzzle it out.  I have never found Lisp to be inherently
> > "obvious".
> Oh, but things are different here: this is Scheme!  ;-)

Oh.  That's right!  It is _so_ different.  ;)

> Just out of curiosity: why are you writing Scheme if you don't like it?

I needed an extension language for my templates.  The Scheme/Guile/Lisp
code is embedded in my template and when my interpreter stumbles into
it, it collects the text and says, "here!  You deal with this". (i.e.
it calls some variation on scm_c_eval_string()).

> While you're at reading Scheme code from a file, why not use Scheme
> construct (be it from Scheme of C code) whose purpose are exactly that?
> Consider the following excerpt:
>   (with-input-from-file "chbouib.scm"
>     read)

Because the file is mostly *NOT* scheme.  There is just some
embedded scheme phrases.  I mmap the text (private and read/write)
and parse its components.  The Scheme pieces get passed to Guile.
I know the file name and line number where these pieces come from.
I want Guile error messages to reflect the file/line where these
things live.  :)

Thanks again - Bruce

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]