From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <cgen-return-1433-listarch-cgen=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 20367 invoked by alias); 15 Jul 2003 19:05:21 -0000
Mailing-List: contact cgen-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cgen-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cgen/>
List-Post: <mailto:cgen@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:cgen-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Sender: cgen-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 20360 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2003 19:05:20 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO touchme.toronto.redhat.com) (207.219.125.105)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 15 Jul 2003 19:05:20 -0000
Received: from toenail.toronto.redhat.com (toenail.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.211])
	by touchme.toronto.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id D07C6800095; Tue, 15 Jul 2003 15:05:19 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from toenail.toronto.redhat.com (IDENT:fche@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by toenail.toronto.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h6FJ5JoM014692;
	Tue, 15 Jul 2003 15:05:19 -0400
Received: (from fche@localhost)
	by toenail.toronto.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h6FJ5JXR014690;
	Tue, 15 Jul 2003 15:05:19 -0400
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 19:05:00 -0000
From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>
To: Doug Evans <dje@transmeta.com>
Cc: cgen@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: guile 1.6 conversion
Message-ID: <20030715190518.GG10371@redhat.com>
References: <200307151857.LAA20731@casey.transmeta.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="C1iGAkRnbeBonpVg"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200307151857.LAA20731@casey.transmeta.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
X-SW-Source: 2003-q3/txt/msg00009.txt.bz2


--C1iGAkRnbeBonpVg
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-length: 482

Hi -

dje wrote:
> The biggest task in converting to guile 1.6 is handling the
> stricter type checking on string operations. [...]
> Let's keep the notion of being able to freely pass symbols to
> a "string-append"-like function, but just give it a different name
> like strsym-append or some such.

That's fine.
(Can a scheme macro be made conditional on the symbol-ness of its
actual arguments, so that this strsym-append thingie is a macro
rather than a full function?)

- FChE

--C1iGAkRnbeBonpVg
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-length: 189

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/FFBuVZbdDOm/ZT0RAkiLAJ9MyHMiBhe/8q2EH5DHnN626Hb0wQCghb3W
7Pbyq0gxZDXipKcWsskYSE4=
=mP3R
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--C1iGAkRnbeBonpVg--