From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Sergey Poznyakoff Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Release Guile, now ;-) [was:] Re: GC rewrite, first version. Date: Sun, 04 Aug 2002 23:57:24 +0300 Organization: Farlep-Internet Sender: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <200208042057.g74KvOb05512@Mirddin.farlep.net> References: <3D4D9205.8032FA18@pacbell.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1028495548 26796 127.0.0.1 (4 Aug 2002 21:12:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2002 21:12:28 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Rob Browning , rm@fabula.de, Han-Wen Nienhuys , Dirk Herrmann , guile-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17bSfq-0006y5-00 for ; Sun, 04 Aug 2002 23:12:26 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17bSgR-0002fi-00; Sun, 04 Aug 2002 17:13:03 -0400 Original-Received: from ns1.farlep.net ([213.130.0.1] helo=Mirddin.farlep.net) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17bSfT-0002P8-00 for ; Sun, 04 Aug 2002 17:12:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Mirddin.farlep.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Mirddin.farlep.net with ESMTP id g74KvOb05512; Sun, 4 Aug 2002 23:57:24 +0300 Original-To: Bruce Korb In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 04 Aug 2002 13:43:49 PDT." <3D4D9205.8032FA18@pacbell.net> Errors-To: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:972 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:972 > Which is exactly the problem. Guile should *not* be exporting > its config.h header. Further, since Guile should not be doing > it, anyone depending upon the Guile-configured values has mis- > coded their program. On that theory, the config header Guile > exports should be free to prefix all its values. Guile should > do this. [...] > > Imagine a developer who wishes to use Guile as an extension > > language for his package, he then would need to change almost all his > > configuration suite. > > To the contrary. Guile needs to do this. Agreed to both points. Another (yet related) question: Should guile-doc-snarf stuff be installed to bin as guile-snarf is? I believe it should. If a developer needs to use guile-snarf then he will surely need to use guile-doc-snarf, yet the latter is a noinst_SCRIPTS target. I guess this is inconsistent. For example, the GNU radius project provides a set of scheme primitives via SCM_DEFINE. To process the sources I need to include in the package a copy of guile-doc-snarf (for version 1.4 as well as for 1.6). It would be a lot easier if Guile had installed all the snarfers. Regards, Sergey _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel