[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Why Ice-9?
From: |
Andy Wingo |
Subject: |
Re: Why Ice-9? |
Date: |
Tue, 13 Jul 2010 23:20:35 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) |
On Mon 12 Jul 2010 10:07, Thien-Thi Nguyen <address@hidden> writes:
> () address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès)
> () Sat, 10 Jul 2010 16:17:07 +0200
>
> ‘system’ may be more risky in that respect. ‘guile’ would have been a
> better choice, but I’m afraid it’s too late (in theory it isn’t, but...).
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Perhaps we can start discussing "directory aliases", a feature whereby
> (foo bar baz) can be specified to resolve (perhaps in multiple steps)
> to (actual baz). We alias only directories, not full module names, to
> avoid having to deal with ‘%load-extensions’.
There are also submodule binders, in git guile, that can be used to
implement this.
> - Module name directory part (of aliases, of fully-resolved)
> must be non-empty?
>
> - Will dealing with ‘%load-extensions’ be in the future plans?
>
> - Where/how to store alias info. Can this mechanism be unified
> with one for resolved modules (e.g., Guile 1.4.x module catalogs)?
I don't understand the problem solved by these things; I would need more
details to comment, I think.
Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/