Re: [Chicken-users] Bugs in documentation and Mac OS X 10.6.8 executable generation broken

[Watson Ladd]

csi has it for making scripts run. This could simply be a case of me
assuming that the interpreter and compiler took similar options, which
is likely. So now i see what happens: csc takes the -ss switch and
interprets it as -s, which causes the result.

So what is the correct way to compile an SRFI-22 compliant script to
an executable?
Sincerely,
Watson Ladd

On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 4:50 AM, Christian Kellermann
<address@hidden> wrote:
> Hello Watson,
>
> * Watson Ladd <address@hidden> [111205 11:32]:
>
>> man csc suggests sending bug reports to address@hidden I
>> did so, and received a message back indicating it was bounced as I was
>> not a subscriber. i
>
>> csc has no comprehensive listing of options. And
>> lastly, the bug that started this entire exercise, on Mac OS X csc -ss
>> generates a Mach O bundle, not an executable.
>
> csc -h produces this list for me, a detailed description might be
> found in the manual or on the online copy: http://api.call-cc.org/doc/csc
>
> From your description I am not able to guess what you want to do.
>
> To generate a "normal" executable with chicken from a scheme file
> called "foo.scm" one would call csc like this:
>
> $ csc foo.scm
>
> to generate a binary "foo".
>
> The -s switch is used to generate shared objects, usually used when
> compiling modules as extensions. See
> http://api.call-cc.org/doc/chicken/eggs for details on those.
>
> I am not sure where you got the "-ss" switch from, where did you
> find that and what did you intend to do?
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Christian
>
> --
> Who can (make) the muddy water (clear)? Let it be still, and it will
> gradually become clear. Who can secure the condition of rest? Let
> movement go on, and the condition of rest will gradually arise.
>  -- Lao Tse.



-- 
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little
Temporary Safety deserve neither  Liberty nor Safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin