From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Neil Jerram Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Guile 1.8 success on `i386-apple-darwin9.6.0' Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 20:14:39 +0000 Message-ID: <8763hurads.fsf@arudy.ossau.uklinux.net> References: <87prg49ppn.fsf@gnu.org> <87ocvo875p.fsf@gnu.org> <87r60kq9bc.fsf@arudy.ossau.uklinux.net> <87skl0vuex.fsf@gnu.org> <87iqlwq625.fsf@arudy.ossau.uklinux.net> <87ab774a1n.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1238184905 5972 80.91.229.12 (27 Mar 2009 20:15:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 20:15:05 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=) Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 27 21:16:22 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 1LnITV-00009K-4Z for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 27 Mar 2009 21:16:21 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58068 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LnIS7-0005Jz-Sl for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 27 Mar 2009 16:14:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LnIS1-0005GF-E8 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Mar 2009 16:14:49 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LnIRw-00052s-IZ for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Mar 2009 16:14:48 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=41856 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LnIRw-00052a-Dy for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Mar 2009 16:14:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mail3.uklinux.net ([80.84.72.33]:41922) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LnIRt-0001y7-TG; Fri, 27 Mar 2009 16:14:42 -0400 Original-Received: from arudy (host86-157-180-39.range86-157.btcentralplus.com [86.157.180.39]) by mail3.uklinux.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE1DD1F6C4C; Fri, 27 Mar 2009 20:14:40 +0000 (GMT) Original-Received: from arudy.ossau.uklinux.net (arudy [127.0.0.1]) by arudy (Postfix) with ESMTP id B637038013; Fri, 27 Mar 2009 20:14:39 +0000 (GMT) In-Reply-To: <87ab774a1n.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22's?= message of "Fri\, 27 Mar 2009 09\:58\:12 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4-2.6 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:8343 Archived-At: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=E8s) writes: > Good morning! Hello again! >> Just one nit: I think there's now only 1 piece of Automake magic being >> relied on, so you could update that text (in Makefile.am) and remove >> the "2. ". > > Right, I did this: > > http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guile.git/commit/?id=3D0fe95f9c4ce0637= 81e79a15bc123c57c33ef9755 Thanks, that looks good. > So IIUC you're advocating the creation of 88 new header files, right? Potentially, yes. :-) > I think I'd prefer the single-private-header option, but I'm not 100% > convinced either. > > Actually there's yet another option: enclose internal declarations in > "#ifdef LIBGUILE_IN_LIBGUILE" or similar, which we only define when > compiling Guile itself. This is what Glibc does with, e.g., > `__LIBC_INTERNAL_MATH_INLINES' and what GMP does with > `__GMP_WITHIN_GMP'. I think I like it better. That sounds fine to me too - so I guess we should choose this approach. Although I would find "LIBGUILE_INTERNAL" more intuitive than "LIBGUILE_IN_LIBGUILE". Regards, Neil