From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rob Browning Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Items blocking release 1.6.1 (2002-04-21) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 16:25:21 -0500 Sender: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <871yd7ify6.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> References: <874ri3jxqx.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> <87adrvigjs.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1019510885 20541 127.0.0.1 (22 Apr 2002 21:28:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 21:28:05 +0000 (UTC) Cc: mvo@zagadka.ping.de, guile-devel@gnu.org, guile-user@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 16zlLw-0005LC-00 for ; Mon, 22 Apr 2002 23:28:05 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16zlLf-00070d-00; Mon, 22 Apr 2002 17:27:47 -0400 Original-Received: from dsl-209-87-109-2.constant.com ([209.87.109.2] helo=defaultvalue.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16zlJL-0006nn-00; Mon, 22 Apr 2002 17:25:23 -0400 Original-Received: from raven.i.defaultvalue.org (raven.i.defaultvalue.org [192.168.1.7]) by defaultvalue.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 086BC1BF9; Mon, 22 Apr 2002 16:25:22 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: by raven.i.defaultvalue.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CF09911D3; Mon, 22 Apr 2002 16:25:21 -0500 (CDT) Original-To: ttn@glug.org In-Reply-To: <87adrvigjs.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> (Rob Browning's message of "Mon, 22 Apr 2002 16:12:23 -0500") Original-Lines: 24 User-Agent: Gnus/5.090006 (Oort Gnus v0.06) Emacs/21.2 (i386-debian-linux-gnu) Errors-To: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 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:458 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:458 Rob Browning writes: > In this particular case, instead of the response you posted, I'd like > to hear what your specific complaints are wrt bound?, and to hear what > fix you have in mind, if any. For example, you mention using > out-of-band communications, but can this be done in a way that doesn't > force everyone to change their code anyway? If not, then how is it > any different than just removing bound? Also FWIW the guile 1.4 info pages don't mention bound? AFAICT, and anyone who found the mention of it in NEWS also saw: The optional argument module also exports the macros `let-optional', `let-optional*', `let-keywords', `let-keywords*' and `bound?'. These are not documented here because they may be removed in the future, but full documentation is still available in optargs.scm. So bound?'s status was somewhat ambiguous in our last release. -- Rob Browning rlb @defaultvalue.org, @linuxdevel.com, and @debian.org Previously @cs.utexas.edu GPG=1C58 8B2C FB5E 3F64 EA5C 64AE 78FE E5FE F0CB A0AD _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel