[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] string-index in extras and srfi-13
From: |
Sven Hartrumpf |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] string-index in extras and srfi-13 |
Date: |
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 22:45:06 +0100 (CET) |
On 12 Nov 2002, felix <address@hidden> wrote:
> address@hidden wrote:
> >>I don't know what's going to happen. But the abiguity is bad anyway:
> >>I need both chicken units 'extras' and 'srfi-13'. both define a
> >>'string-index' but different. Which one is going to be used (I need
> >>the srfi-13 one).
> >
> >
> > Yes! I found this the other day, too. It was very confusing until I
> > realised the definitions were different!
> >
> > I think changing the order of (require)s let me choose the right
> > one. I don't know if changing the order of (declare (uses)) would
> > help.
>
> That's right. The one apearing later in the declaration, or
> the one `required' later is the one that will overwrite the
> previous definition.
>
> >
> > How could the ambiguity best be resolved? Rename the 'extras' version
> > of string-index to something else?
Yes, I would give preference to the SRFI, too.
>
> That would be the best solution. Any ideas?
New names for the version from extras:
1. strings-index
OR
2. string-index-n
OR
3. drop it! (in chicken, it seems to be used only once (csi.scm) and this
occurrence is even compatible with srfi-13!)
I prefer the last option.
Ciao
Sven