Re: [Chicken-users] Compiling w/ syntax-case

[Matt Gushee]

Hi, Felix--

Sorry for the long-delayed response. My job is exhausting yet low-paying 
and has nothing to do with programming ... then with family 
responsibilities on top of that, sometimes I can only find a few hours 
on the weekend for projects like this :-(

I am still working on the PDF code. It seems to work all right; at 
least, the examples run w/o error and produce pdf files, though there is 
at least one discrepancy between the output and the corresponding 
example from CL-PDF. That may be just different rather than wrong, but 
it bears investigating.

Still having trouble with compilation, though.

felix winkelmann wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 4:52 AM, Matt Gushee <address@hidden> wrote:
> > But anyway, I have previously worked through various tutorials and developed
> > a few simple programs w/ Chicken, and I'm now attempting to create an
> > extension library for the first time. Not my original work, though--this is
> > in fact a port from PLT Scheme of the 'scm-pdf' package, which in turn was
> > ported to PLT from the 'cl-pdf' Common Lisp package.
>
> Hey, cool! I'd be interested to try that out.
>
> Now, there are basically three ways of making your code work:
>
> 1. remove the module stuff, put syntax-definitions and non-syntax definitions
>   into separate files and, when using the syntax, pass "-X <syntax-defs-file>"
>   to csc to make the syntax available at compile time.

I chose this option. In any case, it doesn't seem like the syntax-case 
module system does much that you can't do w/ Chicken declarations 
(except maybe it's a bit more portable).

> Can you send me the code? Perhaps I find some time to give it a try.

Yes, I'll do that.

--
Matt Gushee
: Bantam - lightweight file manager : matt.gushee.net/software/bantam/ :
: RASCL's A Simple Configuration Language :     matt.gushee.net/rascl/ :