Re: [dev-serveez] switching to guile

[Martin Grabmueller]

> From: "Raimi 'Raimi' Jacob" <address@hidden>
> Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 20:29:56 +0100 (CET)
> 
> On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Martin Grabmueller wrote:
> 
> /usr[/local]/include/libguile.h

If you are interested in Guile's hash table functions, have a look at
/usr/local/include/libguile/hashtab.h.

> I dont really care for sizzle / guile syntax compatibility. I just want a
> syntax that is non-schemer understandable.

I think that alist syntax is not worse than Sizzle hash syntax, unless
you come from Perl.

#{foo => bar}
  vs.
(foo . bar)

is not much of a difference.

> OK... as long as i can traverse them from the C end...

It's pretty much the same as for Sizzle.  The biggest difference is
that you have to install exception handlers when using Guile, because
Guile's type checking macros longjmp() on errors.

> Ha... they all use hot water for cooking :-)

You bet.

> Ok, that's better. But not really. The syntax for hash creation sucks. I'd
> rather use alists than that [syntax].

Fine for me.  alists are easier to handle anyway.

> (define-server! "server name" "server type" <some good syntax for a
> hash/alist>)
> 
> i'd also rather call it define-server than register-server. doesnt sound
> that coder-tongue.

I don't care for the name.  define-server[!] is fine for me.

> define_server would be a scheme-callable c routine getting 3
> arguments: server name, type and a hash/alist of things that are copied
> into a struct. i suspect that can't be that hard.

Correct.

> > Of course, there is still the problem with Guile on Windoze.
> 
> I hope that the guile people are willing to accept patches from ela. he
> made sizzle work on windoze, so he can make guile [core] work on windoze,
> too (i'll help him, of course).

I'll dig through the guile-devel archives, because someone already
tried to port Guile to Windows.  Stay tuned.

'mgrabmue
-- 
Martin Grabmueller              address@hidden
http://www.pintus.de/mgrabmue/  address@hidden on EFnet