Re: Release Guile, now ;-) [was:] Re: GC rewrite, first version.

[Sergey Poznyakoff]

> Which is exactly the problem.  Guile should *not* be exporting
> its config.h header.  Further, since Guile should not be doing
> it, anyone depending upon the Guile-configured values has mis-
> coded their program.  On that theory, the config header Guile
> exports should be free to prefix all its values.  Guile should
> do this.
[...]
> > Imagine a developer who wishes to use Guile as an extension
> > language for his package, he then would need to change almost all his
> > configuration suite.
> 
> To the contrary.  Guile needs to do this.

Agreed to both points. Another (yet related) question: Should
guile-doc-snarf stuff be installed to bin as guile-snarf is? I believe
it should. If a developer needs to use guile-snarf then he will surely
need to use guile-doc-snarf, yet the latter is a noinst_SCRIPTS
target. I guess this is inconsistent.

For example, the GNU radius project provides a set of scheme
primitives via SCM_DEFINE. To process the sources I need to include
in the package a copy of guile-doc-snarf (for version 1.4 as well as
for 1.6). It would be a lot easier if Guile had installed all the
snarfers.

Regards,
Sergey