Re: Finally ready to talk more substantively about 1.9 (and tng).

[Andy Wingo]

Copying to guile-devel to show my ignorance to all!

On Sat, 2004-05-08 at 19:40, Andy Wingo wrote:
> Hey,
> 
> On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 18:23, Andreas Rottmann wrote:
> > >  (for-each (lambda (f) (close f)) items)
> > 
> > This should be (for-each (lambda (file) (close file)) items) 
> 
> Or, as a bikeshed, (for-each close files).
> 
> > I agree that these names are a bit overly generic. I'll quote the list
> > of maybe too generic (g-wrap) exports here, so we can discuss about
> > name changes.
> > 
> >    description
> >    typespec 
> >    c-name
> >    argument-count input-argument-count optional-argument-count
> >    arguments argument-types
> >    return-type return-typespec
> >    generic-name 
> >    class-name type options c-type-name all-types add-option!
> 
> OK, another nitpick. GTK is where I'm most familiar with generic
> functions. When they have getters, they use `get-' before the name. It
> is a mental clue that the function is a generic. It's not so schemy, but
> then, generic functions aren't all that schemy either. And of course
> `get-' doesn't make sense as an accessor. Perhaps then you should be
> using slot-set!, etc anyway. Just a thought.
> 
> Cheers,
-- 
Andy Wingo <address@hidden>