Unspecified make-ipair-comparator
Arvydas Silanskas
(19 Feb 2022 21:56 UTC)
|
Re: Unspecified make-ipair-comparator
Arthur A. Gleckler
(21 Feb 2022 02:50 UTC)
|
Re: Unspecified make-ipair-comparator
John Cowan
(21 Feb 2022 20:23 UTC)
|
Re: Unspecified make-ipair-comparator
Shiro Kawai
(21 Feb 2022 20:39 UTC)
|
Re: Unspecified make-ipair-comparator
Arvydas Silanskas
(21 Feb 2022 21:51 UTC)
|
Re: Unspecified make-ipair-comparator
Shiro Kawai
(21 Feb 2022 22:33 UTC)
|
Re: Unspecified make-ipair-comparator
Arvydas Silanskas
(22 Feb 2022 00:21 UTC)
|
Re: Unspecified make-ipair-comparator
Shiro Kawai
(22 Feb 2022 00:38 UTC)
|
Re: Unspecified make-ipair-comparator
Arvydas Silanskas
(28 Feb 2022 12:36 UTC)
|
Re: Unspecified make-ipair-comparator
Arthur A. Gleckler
(01 Mar 2022 01:34 UTC)
|
Re: Unspecified make-ipair-comparator
Arthur A. Gleckler
(27 Mar 2022 23:34 UTC)
|
Re: Unspecified make-ipair-comparator
Arvydas Silanskas
(30 May 2022 07:56 UTC)
|
Re: Unspecified make-ipair-comparator Jeremy Steward (08 Jun 2022 03:16 UTC)
|
Ah yes, I had this on the horizon. What was the intended MR to submit? (Side note: should we make a new thread?) I just pushed the most recent upstream changes to CHICKEN under version 1.7, along with a SRFI-128 dependency. Apologies for not getting to this, I've been traveling for the last month and a bit so I haven't really spent time reviewing much of anything I maintain. On 2/28/22 18:34, Arthur A. Gleckler wrote: > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022, 4:36 AM Arvydas Silanskas > <xxxxxx@gmail.com > <mailto:xxxxxx@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > Should I do changes against his fork, and then make a pull request > upstream without his involvement? > Or perhaps I should refactor the test so that it'd be runnable by > more implementations, and refactor it to be a r7rs application with > cond-expand to srfi 64 and chibi test? > > > Either would be a welcome contribution. I leave it up to you to choose > based on how much time and energy you have. > -- Jeremy Steward