[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-hackers] encoded-literals
From: |
John Cowan |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-hackers] encoded-literals |
Date: |
Wed, 19 Dec 2007 08:14:41 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) |
felix winkelmann scripsit:
> I have merged the "encoded-literals" branch into the trunk, in which
> literals in code are decoded at runtime from a machine-independent
> binary format.
Does this mean that the restriction against compiling code that contains
bignum literals has been lifted?
--
My confusion is rapidly waxing John Cowan
For XML Schema's too taxing: address@hidden
I'd use DTDs http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
If they had local trees --
I think I best switch to RELAX NG.