[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Plan for 2.0
From: |
Neil Jerram |
Subject: |
Re: Plan for 2.0 |
Date: |
Wed, 7 Jan 2009 23:22:17 +0000 |
2009/1/5 Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden>:
>
>> One specific query... Although I advocated removing GH before, I
>> don't feel 100% confident that that's the right thing for 2.0. I'm
>> wondering now if we should instead move the GH code into a separate
>> library, "libgh", but continue to provide this as part of the Guile
>> distribution. Moving the code out of libguile will still achieve the
>> important objectives of (1) reducing the size of the libguile code
>> that developers need to look at and work with, and (2) ensuring that
>> GH is implementable on top of the advertised SCM API; but keeping
>> libgh in the distribution will be a significant help for users who are
>> still using GH (who will just need to add -lgh to their link line).
>
> I never considered it urgent, but I think it should be either completely
> removed (as is currently the case) or left in `libguile'. Moving it to
> another library would make it essentially worthless since it would make
> it incompatible anyway.
Why would that make it worthless and incompatible? Wouldn't it allow
existing source code to continue to compile and link?
Thanks,
Neil
Re: Plan for 2.0, Neil Jerram, 2009/01/07