[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The GH interface. (was: Patch for gh.h)
From: |
Rob Browning |
Subject: |
Re: The GH interface. (was: Patch for gh.h) |
Date: |
01 May 2001 22:47:48 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 |
Marius Vollmer <address@hidden> writes:
> > I think r5rs functions should be included inside gh.h
> > so users stay away from libguile as possible
>
> Yes. What do people think of the GH interface, in general?
When I was getting started with guile, the gh_ interface was after a
short while a real hinderance. The problem was that the documentation
(at least then) made it sound like using any scm_* functions was a bad
idea, risky, undocumented, and subject to change.
The problem is that as soon as I was doing non-trivial things in guile
on the C side (even something as simple as (< x y), I really *neeeded*
the scm_functions, but in accordance with the warning in the docs, I
spend a decent amount of time trying to avoid non gh_ functions.
After a while, I just decided to ignore the docs and started using
whatever I needed from libguile. Then I was much happier :>
FWIW
--
Rob Browning <address@hidden> PGP=E80E0D04F521A094 532B97F5D64E3930
Re: The GH interface. (was: Patch for gh.h), Chris Cramer, 2001/05/02
Re: The GH interface. (was: Patch for gh.h), Martin Grabmueller, 2001/05/02