Re: Re: [hackers-il] scheme
- On Wed, 10 May 2000, Shlomi Fish wrote:
>And what if it isn't? Do you get an ordered exception, or a random
> (define mydll (load-dll "shlomif"))
> (define stub1 (get-dll-func mydll "hello" (list "int" "string") "int"))
> (define ret (stub1 5 "Argument No. 2"))
> Now, whatever is found in the function hello in the shlomif shared library
> is nothing of anybody' concern as long as its a function that returns an
> integer and accepts an integer and a string.
segfault? (Don't be too hasty to answer: the first is impossible to
implement if the dll comes from C, the second is simply unacceptable to
any Scheme programmer. What about memory management issues? Who owns the
memory passed to the routine? And the memory returned from it? What
happens if the routine uses a call/cc to call to a higher up scheme
> > What Perl syntax? That horrible mess of characters?That doesn't make it less messy.
> The perl syntax is messy but I happen to like it.
> > What Scheme syntax? The one that doesn't exist?What I mean is that Scheme's "syntax" is just a parse-tree serialization.
> What do you mean by Scheme Syntax not existing?
No shift/reduce left/right association, priorities, or any of those things
which makes a syntax. IOW, Scheme can be defined without syntax: just
explain the semantics of lists. The "syntax" is simply the serialization
format defined by the functions "read" and "write". If you re-implement
these, you get a Scheme with a different syntax.
And please: cut the signature from messages you reply to!
Moshe Zadka <moshez@...>
http://www.linux.org.il -- we put the penguin in .com