From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Discussion for %display-auto-compilation-messages (and --no-auto-compilation-messages option) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 09:18:51 +0100 Message-ID: <87eh1ppe38.fsf@pobox.com> References: <53125A46.3010407@gmail.com> <87a9d8tib7.fsf@gnu.org> <87r45qov0b.fsf@pobox.com> <87vbv23rhy.fsf@gnu.org> <8761n1k7s7.fsf@yeeloong.lan> <871txpk5p5.fsf@yeeloong.lan> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1395821941 10976 80.91.229.3 (26 Mar 2014 08:19:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 08:19:01 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , guile-devel@gnu.org To: Mark H Weaver Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 26 09:19:11 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WSj3G-0001NL-5Q for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 09:19:10 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46175 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WSj3F-0007u3-Nw for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 04:19:09 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53990) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WSj37-0007ri-V8 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 04:19:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WSj33-00070i-0f for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 04:19:01 -0400 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:58790 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WSj32-0006z4-TE; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 04:18:56 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11677119AB; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 04:18:56 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=DF0jrNxvHSMdvKaJsvOT6vT0/dE=; b=cDW81t Sku03Xs3lMu4ZHguT2+DEPTopWb6G315LWTPIuro1BoXlCpIrdjOJ1gqL9Qeayxs wkQs3VcjO/ZdVmbxGXueV4Ut9ddOyWXQxduJmfqlNNsjlMuArUS+TLL6Pa1Mki5g u91L0isqRHHo6oVRJR5rByJhWjswNongN79wU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=IJgRKYK5Y8wMJ1k17KJx3uLLqYoerMpE lvclYZ1DSOrRIOlyrNcp2C6ANNuPHKEsjetfSN7vR3zL81MrA8fg6mnzPIqL1m/P EXJfm1NnjxUmOplYXauxMoByGwjV9JWysjdqH108RaB6HYfa8gFzosAynsb+NJ+/ RUXOwjc6I7s= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 053DE119A9; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 04:18:56 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from badger (unknown [88.160.190.192]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4D154119A8; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 04:18:54 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <871txpk5p5.fsf@yeeloong.lan> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Tue, 25 Mar 2014 23:19:02 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 4539CA58-B4BF-11E3-B8B2-873F0E5B5709-02397024!a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-Received-From: 208.72.237.25 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:17024 Archived-At: On Wed 26 Mar 2014 04:19, Mark H Weaver writes: > Mark H Weaver writes: > > It occurs to me that one possibility would be to allow some of these > parameters to effectively mirror the value of some other parameter. > One way to implement this would be to make the corresponding fluid be a > thunk that returns a port, instead of the port itself. The converter > could accept either a port or a parameter, and convert each of these to > a suitable thunk. Finally, we'd make custom 'current-warning-port' and > 'current-error-port' procedures that would handling calling the thunk. This would mean that you couldn't use current-warning-port as a parameter and a procedure. I think this complexity argument is sufficient to argue against having more current-foo-ports :) Anyd -- http://wingolog.org/