* module/ice-9/channel.scm (eval): Fix number of arguments to
`guile:eval'.
* module/oop/goops/save.scm (write-readably): Fix number of arguments to
`write-array'.
* module/srfi/srfi-19.scm (priv:char->int): Fix number of arguments to
`priv:time-error'.
* module/srfi/srfi-35.scm (%make-condition-type): New procedure.
(make-condition-type, make-compound-condition-type): Use it.
* test-suite/tests/srfi-35.test ("condition
types")["struct-vtable-name"]: New test.
* module/ice-9/psyntax.scm (case-lambda, case-lambda*): Add
implementations of these, present in the base environment.
* module/ice-9/psyntax-pp.scm: Regenerated.
* module/srfi/srfi-16.scm (case-lambda): Replace the core's case-lambda
definition with our own. We're not quite ready to switch yet.
* module/language/tree-il.scm (tree-il-fold): Fix for let-values case.
(make-tree-il-folder): New public macro, makes a multi-valued folder
specific to the number of seeds that the user wants.
* module/language/tree-il/optimize.scm (optimize!): Reverse the order of
inline! and fix-letrec!, as the latter might expose opportunities for
the former.
* module/srfi/srfi-11.scm (let-values): Reimplement in terms of
syntax-case, so that its expressions may reference hygienically bound
variables. See the NEWS for the rationale.
(let*-values): An empty let*-values still introduces a local `let'
binding contour.
* module/system/base/syntax.scm (record-case): Yukkkk. Reimplement in
terms of syntax-case. Ug-ly, but see the NEWS again: "Lexical bindings
introduced by hygienic macros may not be referenced by nonhygienic
macros."
* module/Makefile.am:
* module/srfi/srfi-4/gnu.scm: New module, for extensions to srfi-4.
Currently defines the any->FOOvector family.
* libguile/srfi-4.c:
* libguile/srfi-4.i.c: Dispatch scm_any_to_FOOvector calls to the
scheme-implemented functions in (srfi srfi-4 gnu).
* module/srfi/srfi-35.scm: Use `(ice-9 syncase)'.
(define-condition-type, condition): Rewritten using `syntax-rules'.
(compound-condition, condition-instantiation): New helper internal
macros. Thanks to Andy Wingo for his help!
* module/language/tree-il/compile-glil.scm (flatten): For applications in
"drop" context, allow the procedure to return unspecified values
(including 0 values).
* test-suite/tests/tree-il.test ("application"): Adapt test.
* module/srfi/srfi-18.scm (wrap): Clarify.
* test-suite/tests/srfi-18.test: Fix so that the expression importing
srfi-18 is expanded before the tests. However the tests are still
failing, something about 0-valued returns...
* module/srfi/srfi-69.scm: Move the macros up before the functions that
use them, so that the compiler can do its job.
(hash-table-walk): While it is true about what I said about R5RS
before, it seems that for R6 this will have to change. Anyway. In the
meantime, since the test suite checks that hash-table-walk procedures'
return values and number of return values are ignored, call that
procedure within a call-with-values.
* module/srfi/srfi-19.scm: Some parts of this code used a strange idiom,
`(values)', to indicate that a procedure did nothing. However, quoth
R5RS:
Except for continuations created by the `call-with-values'
procedure, all continuations take exactly one value.
Indeed the VM indicated this error. I reworked the code to avoid these
cases.
