From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David =?UTF-8?B?U8OpdmVyaW4=?= Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Plan for 2.0 Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 13:21:09 -0200 Organization: Alto Air Services [http://www.altosw.be/aas/] Message-ID: <20090105132109.62534a24@altosw.be> References: <49dd78620901031038i6f6c678o5cebc21b217374d2@mail.gmail.com> <20090104133522.5ef7df67@altosw.be> <49dd78620901040825gd7e1d72w61727d2db1cd37ef@mail.gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1231169141 635 80.91.229.12 (5 Jan 2009 15:25:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 15:25:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel To: "Neil Jerram" Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 05 16:26:51 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LJrLi-0003CN-7t for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2009 16:26:38 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41375 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LJrKS-0007kC-M0 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2009 10:25:20 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LJrHS-0006iv-DW for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2009 10:22:14 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LJrHJ-0006fN-DS for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2009 10:22:13 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35635 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LJrHJ-0006fG-2j for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2009 10:22:05 -0500 Original-Received: from maximusconfessor.all2all.org ([62.58.108.13]:36128 helo=smtp.all2all.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LJrHG-0005Sm-ST for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2009 10:22:04 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (unknown [192.168.0.2]) by smtp.all2all.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 196DD9F132; Mon, 5 Jan 2009 16:21:59 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from smtp.all2all.net ([192.168.0.1]) by localhost (maximusconfessor.all2all.org [192.168.0.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qKjsmRnB5jpy; Mon, 5 Jan 2009 16:14:48 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [201.29.208.67]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.all2all.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD99F9F114; Mon, 5 Jan 2009 16:21:10 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <49dd78620901040825gd7e1d72w61727d2db1cd37ef@mail.gmail.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.5.0 (GTK+ 2.12.11; i486-pc-linux-gnu) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:7960 Archived-At: Le Sun, 4 Jan 2009 16:25:47 +0000, "Neil Jerram" a =C3=A9crit : > 2009/1/4 David S=C3=A9verin : > > Hi Guilers, > > > > It might be a small thing [and of course not a priority at all], but I'= d love to > > see a small evolution of the manual index structure in order to separat= e scheme > > procedures from others, scheme variables from others...: > > > > * Concept Index > > * Scheme Prodedure Index * C Procedure Index > > * Scheme Variable Index * C Variable Index > > * Scheme Type Index * C Type Index > > * R5RS Index > > > > Being a scheme 'only' programmer, I'd love not to have to scroll through > > gh_* and scm_* ... when I am looking for something in an index. >=20 > Thanks for this idea! >=20 > I'm not persuaded by the procedure/variable/type separation, but I > agree that the Scheme/C separation would be useful. Do you know > Texinfo well enough to look at how we could achieve this? Never used Texinfo :( I could learn, but right now I can not offer more tha= n using guile and giving the best feedback I can on matters I feel knowledgeable en= ough to do so [I am alone managing a small company [+- a year late in my work]]. Cheers, David