Re: Two questions about the guile module system

[Joris van der Hoeven]

> > > What about:
> > >
> > >      module.scm
> > >
> > >   (define-module (module)
> > >           :use-module (library))
> > >
> > >   ...
> > >   (foo)
> > >   ...
> > >
> > > This way, 'module' says explicitely that it is using bindings from
> > > 'library'.
> >
> > That is precisely what I do not want to do. The point is that
> > I have not one library module, but dozens of them. I do not want
> > to respecify all of them over and over again.
>
> Then what about making a new macro that does this speciying for you?
>
> For example:
>
>     (define-macro (define-my-module name . rest)
>       `(define-module ,name
>          :use-module (library)
>          ,@rest))
>
> You then only need to make sure that 'define-my-module' is available
> in the current module when you load a file that uses it.

This is not very satisfactory either, in my opinion.
But I did find a way to hack exporting all symbols
from the public interface of a module.
With this, both my original questions can be answered.
Here is the code:

  (define-macro (export-from . which-list)
    (define (module-exports which)
      (let* ((m (resolve-module which #f))
             (m-public (module-ref m '%module-public-interface #f))
             (l '()))
        (module-for-each (lambda (symb . tail) (set! l (cons symb l))) m-public)
        l))
    (let ((l (apply append (map module-exports which-list))))
      `(export ,@l)))

If you want to include that piece of code into Guile,
then please go ahead. One might want to replace 'export'
by 're-export' in recent versions of Guile.