Re: (define-module (foo) #:import (...)), a la r6rs

[Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>]

Hi,

Procrastinating :)

On Thu 28 Jul 2011 23:23, ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

> Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> skribis:
>
>> So what do you all think about:
>>
>>   (define-module (foo)
>>     #:import ((bar)
>>               (only (baz) qux foo)
>>               ...))
>>
>> Or even:
>>
>>   (define-module (foo)
>>     (import (bar)
>>             (only (baz) qux foo)
>>             ...))
>
> I’d prefer #:use-modules (plural), for consistency:
>
>   (define-module (foo)
>     #:use-modules ((bar)
>                    (baz) #:select (qux foo)
>                    (chbouib) #:renamer (symbol-prefix-proc 'p)))
>
> What do you think?

I don't like the paren placement so much.  Consistency is important, but
TBH I think that we should phase out the "use-module" / "use-modules"
terminology, in favor of "import" terminology of r6rs and the coming
r7rs.

What do you think about that? :-)

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/