From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: ludovic.courtes@laas.fr (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] SRFI-34, SRFI-60 and core bindings Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 11:13:59 +0100 Organization: LAAS-CNRS Message-ID: <878xuougt4.fsf@laas.fr> References: <87zmp4mj1f.fsf@laas.fr> <871x0p4xpf.fsf@zagadka.de> <87r78pxln8.fsf@laas.fr> <87u0dcu0g7.fsf@zagadka.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1134572285 23030 80.91.229.2 (14 Dec 2005 14:58:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 14:58:05 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 14 15:57:56 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from [199.232.75.2] (helo=lists.gnu.org) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EmY08-0003IC-24 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 14 Dec 2005 15:53:04 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EmXzk-0003Lg-GE for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 14 Dec 2005 09:52:40 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EmTiW-0000fa-HW for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Dec 2005 05:18:37 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EmTiO-0000ej-I2 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Dec 2005 05:18:30 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EmTf1-0000H3-1M for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Dec 2005 05:15:00 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.93.0.15] (helo=laas.laas.fr) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24) (Exim 4.34) id 1EmTh3-0007Lx-W7 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Dec 2005 05:17:06 -0500 Original-Received: by laas.laas.fr (8.13.1/8.13.4) with SMTP id jBEAEJ5w020657; Wed, 14 Dec 2005 11:14:20 +0100 (CET) Original-To: Marius Vollmer X-URL: http://www.laas.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 24 Frimaire an 214 de la =?iso-8859-1?Q?R=E9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0xEB1F5364 X-PGP-Key: http://www.laas.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 821D 815D 902A 7EAB 5CEE D120 7FBA 3D4F EB1F 5364 X-OS: powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu Mail-Followup-To: Marius Vollmer , guile-devel@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <87u0dcu0g7.fsf@zagadka.de> (Marius Vollmer's message of "Tue, 13 Dec 2005 23:55:04 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Spam-Score: 0 () X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang at CNRS-LAAS 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 X-Broken-Reverse-DNS: no host name found for IP address 199.232.75.2 Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:5511 Archived-At: Marius Vollmer writes: > When using #:replace, the exporting module is making the promise that > the warning can be surpressed because everything is alright. It can > only do that if the replacing binding is compatible with what it > replaces. So I think we disagree. ;-) Basically, I'm saying that `#:replace' is alright when the module /purposefully/ overrides and binding and is documented to do so, while you say that it should be used only when a module /compatibly/ overrides a binding. I still think that one never types `(use-modules (srfi srfi-60))' inadvertently, which supports the `purposefully' vision. IOW, the "common case" (and this is debatable) is that you _want_ `bit-count' to be overridden when you type this in. And we want to optimize for the common case. In any case, the documentation will have to be updated to whatever vision you think is right. > Often, the user of a module also knows that everything is alright and > wants to surpress the warning. (That's where you come in, > Ludovic. :-) The user can only do that by giving parameters to > use-modules or its own define-module. He should not go and add a > #:replace to the exporting module. The only ways to do avoid the > duplicate warning for a module user currently are to rename the > bindings on import, or to use an explicit #:duplicates handler. > (Right? Anything else?) I find this use of duplicate binding policies quite circumvoluted and unclean for that matter. > Hmm, I think current usage is in line with what I described above. > Right? Right, within Guile. Outside, current usage may be inexistent because it was not documented. Thanks, Ludovic. _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel