Re: scheme-only doc snarfer useful w/ (ice-9 documentation)

[thi]

   From: Rob Browning <address@hidden>
   Date: 24 Apr 2001 15:17:44 -0500

   Hmm, this is an interesting idea, and would definitely save some
   bindir bloat, though it's kinda non-standard.  I worry that you could
   make the same argument for all kinds of programs in /usr/bin.  It
   seems to me that unix has just decreed a shared global namespace for
   executables, and we probably just need to choose our names
   accordingly.

well, although i don't propose changing what's already in /usr/bin, i
don't see why we shouldn't take steps to prevent further bloat, and give
ourselves and users management slack as well.

     echo $(guile-config info bindir)/doc-snarf
     cat $(guile-config --script-location doc-snarf)

yeah, these kinds of variations are fine, although i would use
"guile-config info libexecdir" (or equivalent) instead of "bindir".
when we document this bunch of scripts, we can suggest people use an
alias:

  guile-tools COMMAND ARGS ...
  ==
  exec `guile-config info libexecdir`/COMMAND ARGS ...

etc etc.  this is similar in spirit to how cvs commands are invoked.  i
suspect these commands will be used mostly by programmers, who would not
be afraid of (and might actually welcome) this kind of customizability.
perhaps i am projecting my prejudices here.

thi