Re: Parallel installability, API stability

[Andy Wingo]

On Wed 21 Oct 2009 18:45, address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

> Andy Wingo <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Sure, we need to make well-thought-out changes -- but our current
>> policy of very extended C-level compatibility is very, very limiting,
>> and a big energy drain. If we think we need to change a function
>> interface, well, we just change it, and document the change as well --
>> perhaps even with a Coccinelle[0] patch.
>
> I’d probably be more conservative than you on API changes.  For
> instance, I think ‘scm_search_path()’ and ‘scm_primitive_load()’ should
> be the same in 1.8 and 2.0 (at least at the C level, because in Scheme
> it’s easy to retain compatibility with optional args.)

I'm OK with changing these ones back. I think we agree here.

> Guile is a niche, and so is Scheme.  Among those who develop
> applications using Guile, I bet the vast majority does it on their free
> time.

(Me too.)

But regarding user counts -- I still think we will have many more users
in the future than we have had in the past. We should think of them,
too...

> Thus, I think Guile core should evolve hands in hands with its users,
> making, indeed, only well-thought-out API changes.

OK. I really do think we agree for the most part on this. I'd rather not
spend any more energy on the question.

Regards,

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/