From: Andreas Rottmann <a.rottmann@gmx.at>
To: Julian Graham <joolean@gmail.com>
Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>, guile-devel <guile-devel@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: r6rs libraries, round three
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 02:33:25 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87my2kmxay.fsf@delenn.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2bc5f8210911171255m5a731127idd6876d258584e25@mail.gmail.com> (Julian Graham's message of "Tue, 17 Nov 2009 15:55:52 -0500")
Julian Graham <joolean@gmail.com> writes:
> I probably should have said "rough prototype" instead of "working
> prototype" -- the actual macro that transforms library definitions
> into module definitions is kind of gross and uses datum->syntax a fair
> amount where it probably doesn't need to / shouldn't. I'm no syncase
> wizard. But I'm pretty sure it works for conventional libraries that
> import and export macros and regular bindings. (What I worry about
> are some of the hairier use cases of the whole "phased import"
> mechanism -- like a binding that's imported at `meta' level 2 or
> higher sharing a name with definition imported for use at runtime.)
>
IIRC, R6RS doesn't /require/ that implementations are able to
differentiate bindings from different phases -- e.g. Ikarus essentially
ignores phase specifications (implicit phasing -- there were some
discussions about that on ikarus-users, which I can't find ATM, but [0]
should sum the issue up nicely).
[0] http://www.phyast.pitt.edu/~micheles/scheme/scheme21.html
> What I'm mostly interested in is whether you guys think the version
> and export patches are worth merging in some form or another -- my
> assumption has been these are features we actually want for Guile's
> module system.
>
Are you aware of SRFI-103? It got recently revised to leave out
versions; not supporting them is an option, I guess. Quoting from R6RS:
,----
| When more than one library is identified by a library reference, the
| choice of libraries is determined in some implementation-dependent
| manner.
|
| To avoid problems such as incompatible types and replicated state,
| implementations should prohibit the two libraries whose library names
| consist of the same sequence of identifiers but whose versions do not
| match to co-exist in the same program.
`----
This makes me wonder if versions can be used (or rather be relied on)
sensibly in portable libraries at all...
Regards, Rotty
--
Andreas Rottmann -- <http://rotty.yi.org/>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-18 1:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-26 20:10 r6rs libraries, round three Julian Graham
2009-10-01 4:32 ` Julian Graham
2009-10-24 19:10 ` Julian Graham
2009-10-25 22:01 ` Andy Wingo
2009-10-26 3:53 ` Julian Graham
2009-11-01 19:26 ` Julian Graham
2009-11-16 20:47 ` Julian Graham
2009-11-17 19:56 ` Andy Wingo
2009-11-17 20:55 ` Julian Graham
2009-11-18 1:33 ` Andreas Rottmann [this message]
2009-11-18 6:40 ` Julian Graham
2009-12-13 3:24 ` Julian Graham
2009-12-22 0:10 ` Andy Wingo
2009-12-23 15:35 ` Julian Graham
2009-12-23 16:10 ` Neil Jerram
2009-12-28 22:42 ` Ludovic Courtès
2009-12-24 13:25 ` Andy Wingo
2009-12-27 20:04 ` Julian Graham
2009-11-18 1:18 ` Andreas Rottmann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87my2kmxay.fsf@delenn.lan \
--to=a.rottmann@gmx.at \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=joolean@gmail.com \
--cc=wingo@pobox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).