Re: frisk versus srfi-1 filter

[Mikael Djurfeldt]

Kevin Ryde <address@hidden> writes:

> In the current cvs, I noticed the recent change to remove "filter"
> from (srfi srfi-1) has broken frisk.  For instance,
>
>       guile-tools frisk
>
> produces
>
>       ERROR: no binding `filter' in module (srfi srfi-1)
>
> I guess scripts/frisk can be updated easily enough, but if an
> application might be doing something similar then I wonder if srfi-1
> could provide an alias for filter somehow, for compatibility.

Certainly.  And this exposes other latent bugs.

Some bindings in srfi-1 (such as 'cons') are implemented in the core.
Until now, we've simply omitted those bindings from the export list of
the srfi-1 module.

'filter' was recently turned into a primitive, and therefore also
removed from the export list of srfi-1.

The "frisk" script correctly uses :select to explicitly ask for the
binding "filter" in srfi-1.  Of course people should be able to do
this for *all* bindings of srfi-1, which means that we must re-export
all core bindings.

guile-tools frisk should work now.

2003-03-24  Mikael Djurfeldt  <address@hidden>

        * srfi-1.scm: Re-export all srfi-1 bindings implemented by the
        core.  (Thanks to Kevin Ryde.)