GNU bug report logs - #29669
repl-print - requet for iprovement

Previous Next

Full log

Message #8 received at 29669 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: David Pirotte <david <at> altosw.be>
Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> igalia.com>, Mark H Weaver <mhw <at> netris.org>,
 29669 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#29669: repl-print - requet for iprovement
Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2018 18:26:37 +0200

Hello,

David Pirotte <david <at> altosw.be> skribis:

> From d920d22efe3e77d23004122e21cec420c402f531 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: David Pirotte <david <at> altosw.be>
> Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 21:28:24 -0200
> Subject: [PATCH] Updating repl-print to use truncated-print
>
> * module/system/repl/common.scm (repl-print): Use (truncated-print val),
>   not (write val).  With this update, repl-print becomes 'friendly' wrt
>   large (huge) lists, arrays, srfi-4 butevoectors ...

Note that it’s already possible to do this:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
scheme@(guile-user)> ,use (ice-9 pretty-print)
scheme@(guile-user)> ,o print (lambda (repl obj) (truncated-print obj) (newline))
scheme@(guile-user)> (iota 500)
$20 = (0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 # …)
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

So the question becomes: should we change the default?

I have a slight preference for keeping the default as it is to avoid
surprises, but no strong opinion.

Andy, Mark, others, WDYT?

Ludo’.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.