Re: [Denemo-devel] Denemo warnings and code cleanup

[Richard Shann]

On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 13:52 +0200, Éloi Rivard wrote:
> 
> For readability and coherence, I think program options parsing should
> not be done in view.c.

this arose when introducing scheme, I tried to keep the scheme headers
to just one file, anticipating that they could destabilize denemo's code
- we had an example of this recently, when Jeremiah introduce a foreign
header file (sffile.h) which defined things already defined in Denemo.

However, view.c is monstrously overloaded, (my fault :( )

Richard

> 
> It seems that scm_with_guile() exists with 1.8 :
> https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/docs/docs-1.8/guile-ref/Guile-Initialization-Functions.html#Guile-Initialization-Functions
> 
> 
> 
> 2013/6/21 Richard Shann <address@hidden>
>         On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 13:42 +0200, Éloi Rivard wrote:
>         > Is there a reason to use scm_boot_guile() instead of
>         scm_with_guile()
>         > in main ?
>         
>         
>         I am not sure all these variants existed when I got guile
>         working from
>         inside C. Indeed, I am not sure which ones are available in
>         guile 1.8.
>         Do you see some advantage to using something different?
>         
>         Richard
>         
>         
>         
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         > 2013/6/4 Richard Shann <address@hidden>
>         >         I've just tested this out and it seems to be working
>         fine :)
>         >
>         >         Richard
>         >
>         >
>         >         On Tue, 2013-06-04 at 16:57 +0200, Éloi Rivard
>         wrote:
>         >         > On the split branch, evince is now enable by
>         default, but no
>         >         more
>         >         > mandatory. So now I can compile denemo with gtk2
>         and make
>         >         some larger
>         >         > tests.
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         > 2013/6/4 Éloi Rivard <address@hidden>
>         >         >         I pushed the branch split where the evince
>         part of
>         >         print.c is
>         >         >         now in printview.c . Could you tell me if
>         it is good
>         >         for you ?
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >         2013/6/4 Richard Shann
>         <address@hidden>
>         >         >                 On Tue, 2013-06-04 at 13:23 +0200,
>         Éloi
>         >         Rivard wrote:
>         >         >                 >
>         >         >                 > 2013/6/4 Richard Shann
>         >         <address@hidden>
>         >         >                 >         On Tue, 2013-06-04 at
>         11:40 +0200,
>         >         Éloi
>         >         >                 Rivard wrote:
>         >         >                 >
>         >         >                 >         > Tools are now built
>         when you run
>         >         make.
>         >         >                 >
>         >         >                 >
>         >         >                 >         I have run my usual make
>         (in a
>         >         parallel
>         >         >                 directory to the
>         >         >                 >         source
>         >         >                 >         directory) and it ran
>         ok,
>         >         generating the
>         >         >                 tools in a parallel
>         >         >                 >         directory
>         >         >                 >         to the tools directory
>         containing
>         >         the source
>         >         >                 code of the
>         >         >                 >         tools.
>         >         >                 >
>         >         >                 >         >
>         >         >                 >         > What do you think of
>         >         automatically
>         >         >                 call ./generate_source
>         >         >                 >         > and ./extract_scheme
>         before
>         >         compiling the
>         >         >                 src directory ?
>         >         >                 >
>         >         >                 >
>         >         >                 >         This has to be done in
>         the source
>         >         directory
>         >         >                 not the build
>         >         >                 >         directory
>         >         >                 >         though.
>         >         >                 > You mean in order to make
>         extract_scheme
>         >         work ?
>         >         >
>         >         >                 and generate_source, they have to
>         be
>         >         executed at
>         >         >                 particular places in
>         >         >                 the source tree, not a build
>         directory.
>         >         >                 >
>         >         >                 >
>         >         >                 >         How would you determine
>         the
>         >         dependencies?
>         >         >                 > autotools are very convenient
>         for this. It
>         >         is easy
>         >         >                 to set up
>         >         >                 > dependencies between targets by
>         playing
>         >         with
>         >         >                 Makefile.am files
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >                 In this case a new *.xml file
>         somewhere in
>         >         the
>         >         >                 hierarchy below menus
>         >         >                 should trigger a re-run of
>         extract_scheme.
>         >         It will be
>         >         >                 good if it can be
>         >         >                 done.
>         >         >
>         >         >                 Richard
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >         --
>         >         >         Éloi Rivard - address@hidden
>         >         >
>         >         >         « On perd plus à être indécis qu'à se
>         tromper. »
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         >
>         >         > --
>         >         > Éloi Rivard - address@hidden
>         >         >
>         >         > « On perd plus à être indécis qu'à se tromper. »
>         >         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         > --
>         > Éloi Rivard - address@hidden
>         >
>         > « On perd plus à être indécis qu'à se tromper. »
>         >
>         
>         
>         
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Éloi Rivard - address@hidden
>         
> « On perd plus à être indécis qu'à se tromper. »
>