[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Move port procedures out of toplevel and d
|
From: |
Peter Bex |
|
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Move port procedures out of toplevel and drop most "chicken" imports |
|
Date: |
Sat, 10 Feb 2018 16:12:19 +0100 |
|
User-agent: |
NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) |
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 11:04:48AM +1300, Evan Hanson wrote:
> On 2018-01-28 13:55, Peter Bex wrote:
> > One suggestion: Given that input-port-open? and output-port-open? are
> > in chicken.base, I would find it more intuitive to have port-closed? in
> > chicken.base as well. What do you think?
>
> Sounds good. Here's an updated patch.
I've tested it, and had to put back some (import chicken) clauses
because the CHICKEN I used for bootstrapping (current master) did
not yet have the chicken.base import library which contains these
procedures.
Thus, I put back (import chicken) and added the string port procedures
to chicken.import.scm again. We can take those out once we make a new
prerelease for bootstrapping (which should happen soonish).
Other than that, great work, thanks!
Cheers,
Peter
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature