[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Guile-commits] GNU Guile branch, master, updated. release_1-9-2-164
From: |
Ludovic Courtès |
Subject: |
Re: [Guile-commits] GNU Guile branch, master, updated. release_1-9-2-164-g0d05ae7 |
Date: |
Wed, 09 Sep 2009 09:42:09 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) |
Hi,
Mike Gran <address@hidden> writes:
> On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 01:00 +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
[...]
>> > - return scm_getc (input_port);
>> > + return scm_get_byte_or_eof (input_port);
>>
>> This is actually an earlier change, but the prototype of scm_getc is now
>> different from that in 1.8. Presumably, this means that it’s not
>> source-compatible with 1.8, e.g., on platforms where
>> sizeof (int) < sizeof (scm_t_wchar), right?
I was actually referring to the fact that 1.8 has:
SCM_API int scm_getc (SCM port);
whereas 1.9 has:
SCM_API scm_t_wchar scm_getc (SCM port);
What do you think?
>> > --- a/libguile/strings.h
>> > +++ b/libguile/strings.h
>> > @@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ SCM_API SCM scm_substring_shared (SCM str, SCM start,
>> > SCM end);
>> > SCM_API SCM scm_substring_copy (SCM str, SCM start, SCM end);
>> > SCM_API SCM scm_string_append (SCM args);
>> >
>> > -SCM_INTERNAL SCM scm_i_from_stringn (const char *str, size_t len,
>> > +SCM_API SCM scm_i_from_stringn (const char *str, size_t len,
>> > const char *encoding,
>> >
>> > scm_t_string_failed_conversion_handler
>> > handler);
>> > @@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ SCM_INTERNAL const scm_t_wchar
>> > *scm_i_string_wide_chars (SCM str);
>> > SCM_INTERNAL SCM scm_i_string_start_writing (SCM str);
>> > SCM_INTERNAL void scm_i_string_stop_writing (void);
>> > SCM_INTERNAL int scm_i_is_narrow_string (SCM str);
>> > -SCM_INTERNAL scm_t_wchar scm_i_string_ref (SCM str, size_t x);
>> > +SCM_API scm_t_wchar scm_i_string_ref (SCM str, size_t x);
>>
>> Were these changes intended?
>
> Well, one of the two of them was intended. :)
Shouldn’t both of them remain internal given that they have an ‘_i_’ in
their name?
>> > + (with-locale "en_US.iso88591"
>> > + (pass-if-exception "no args" exception:wrong-num-args
>> > + (regexp-quote))
>>
>> Is the locale part of the API? That is, should programs that use
>> regexps explicitly ask for a locale with 8-bit encoding?
>
> Basically yes. The libc regex is 8-bit, and it uses
> scm_to/from_locale_string to convert regex's input and output.
That’s unfortunate but OTOH it’s the same as in 1.8, so I guess it’s OK.
> Until libunistring comes with Unicode regex, I think this is the best we
> can do.
Yes, that would be neat!
Thanks,
Ludo’.