Guile bug could affect Windows users

[Derek Atkins]

Quoting Mike or Penny Novack <stepbystepfarm at mtdata.com>:

>
>>
>> Additionally, when building the setup.exe on Windows we compile guile from
>> source anyway, so applying a patch that has been sent to bug-guile but is
>> not contained in any release yet is perfectly fine, at least IMHO.
>>
>> -- andi5
>>
>>
>>
> Again I am probably making some wrong assumptions. Compiling WHAT? The
> interpreter certainly, "eval" itself, perhaps a few of the most
> basic/most frequently used function definitions. But with most
> "extendable" languages like LISP and its dialects the bulk of the
> definitions available at the start are usually done in the language
> itself. OR, in "compile and go" implementations that makes little
> difference (any that are added are compiled before execution/evaluation
> as opposed to a strict "interpreter" implementation where the expression
> would be reinterpreted every time used.)
>
> Isn't that true of Guile? Some reason to believe that these particular
> erroneous definitions were part of the compile? Even if they were, what
> difference would that make except perhaps speed when being evaluated?
> They still could be overridden by redefinition, yes?
>
> (I hope not confusing people with bringing up matters of how LISP like
> languages are implemented..)

I think what he meant is that we start with the guild source tree
and create our own guile environment from source.  In other words, we
control the guile environment on windows so we can apply this patch.
Whereas on other platforms we assume the OS/Distro provides guile
to us and we just use it.

-derek
-- 
       Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
       Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board  (SIPB)
       URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/    PP-ASEL-IA     N1NWH
       warlord at MIT.EDU                        PGP key available