[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix for #568
From: |
Felix |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix for #568 |
Date: |
Sun, 03 Feb 2013 22:12:31 +0100 (CET) |
From: Peter Bex <address@hidden>
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix for #568
Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2013 20:50:06 +0100
> On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 08:44:19PM +0100, Peter Bex wrote:
>> What finally made it work was to invert the logic for fetching data and
>> scanning for newline/carriage return characters and copying strings into
>> the line. Now the scan-buffer-line is more complicated, while the
>> port-specific read-line implementations are a little bit simpler.
>
> That reminds me: in posixunix.scm the read-line code sets some slot
> number 5. I was unable to figure out what this was for. It seems to
> update it to the current position in the buffer while it's scanning and
> then resets it to 0 at the end, but this isn't used anywhere I could see.
>
> Because it looks like it's unused and no other port seems to have or use
> a slot 5, I just removed it. Please let me know if this is a mistake!
See "port-position", library.scm.
cheers,
felix
- [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix for #568, Peter Bex, 2013/02/03
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix for #568, Peter Bex, 2013/02/03
- Message not available
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix for #568, Peter Bex, 2013/02/03
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix for #568, Jim Ursetto, 2013/02/03
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix for #568, Peter Bex, 2013/02/03
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix for #568, Jim Ursetto, 2013/02/03
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix for #568, Peter Bex, 2013/02/04
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix for #568, Felix, 2013/02/03
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix for #568,
Felix <=
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix for #568, Christian Kellermann, 2013/02/14