Re: And another deprecation joke

[David Kastrup]

Noah Lavine <address@hidden> writes:

> What you are noticing now is that Guile has some old bits of code that
> were not implemented up to the standards we currently have. Since you
> seem to be using all the weird corners of Guile, you have the
> un-enviable job of going through and finding all of these places so we
> can fix them.

I don't actually consider most of the corners that hit me so far all
that weird: actually they have been either rather basic, or I've had my
nose explicitly rubbed into them by Guile (like with the deprecation
warnings).  That there is no information about non-literal symbol
manipulation in the Guile-1.8 documentation (except mentioning one
should use modules, and the C interface SCM_define) is appalling.  The
Guile-2.0 documentation still does not give any Scheme interfaces, but
at least the C interface descriptions for modules make it easier
guessing the Scheme interfaces.

The Guile maintainers make it a point to say they won't bother with
Guile-1.8 documentation, but it is not like Guile-1.8 is going to
disappear from software distributions anytime soon due to compatibility
issues.

> I'm not going to solve this problem, because I don't know how, but I
> did want to say that I appreciate you finding these things. It is not
> a fun job, but it should be done.

It is not fun, but it is not as much a job rather than an impediment.
It is certainly not a fun job to hear me crash and burn either.  But I
doubt that crashing and burning silently, as others apparently do, will
be much preferable.

-- 
David Kastrup