From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rob Browning Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Text collation Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 01:46:02 -0700 Message-ID: <87mz7kokad.fsf@raven.defaultvalue.org> References: <877j00cirs.fsf@laas.fr> <87hcz3mqhr.fsf@zip.com.au> <87r6x0qjyy.fsf@laas.fr> <877iyrbxj7.fsf@raven.defaultvalue.org> <87wt6rxy6z.fsf@laas.fr> <87ac3m2joj.fsf@raven.defaultvalue.org> <87slhclsj9.fsf@laas.fr> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1161766655 20233 80.91.229.2 (25 Oct 2006 08:57:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 08:57:35 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 25 10:57:34 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GceZl-00006W-AL for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 10:57:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GceZk-00030g-By for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 04:57:28 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GceOp-0007UL-5q for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 04:46:11 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GceOm-0007Tr-SM for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 04:46:09 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GceOk-0007TQ-Gl for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 04:46:07 -0400 Original-Received: from [70.85.129.156] (helo=defaultvalue.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GceOk-0003Eu-Fe for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 04:46:06 -0400 Original-Received: from omen.defaultvalue.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by defaultvalue.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D516290DDF for ; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 01:46:02 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from raven.defaultvalue.org (raven.defaultvalue.org [192.168.1.7]) by omen.defaultvalue.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F542340AA for ; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 01:46:02 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by raven.defaultvalue.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7B9C2355117; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 01:46:02 -0700 (PDT) Original-To: Guile-Devel In-Reply-To: <87slhclsj9.fsf@laas.fr> (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s's?= message of "Wed, 25 Oct 2006 10:16:10 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) 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:6176 Archived-At: ludovic.courtes@laas.fr (Ludovic Court=E8s) writes: > No, it doesn't work. In the latest `guile-reader', I have a couple of > modules that do (part of) what the Awk script in `libguile' does: > parsing the output of `cpp -DSCM_MAGIC_SNARF'. I'd be in favor of > integrating such an approach in Guile core eventually. Yes. It would be nice to have a more comprehensive solution for documentation, one that can be used both internally and externally. > Personally, I would like Guile "core" to be much more modular than what > it is now. I believe many things in what we call "Guile core" are there > just because we want them to be part of the "standard Guile library", > but they certainly to not comprise the "core" or "kernel" of Guile. For > instance, I believe the Gettext-related functions ought to be > distributed with Guile core but as a separate module. Same for > SRFI-1[43]. Not to mention the bits and pieces that are in `boot-9' and > that happen to be visible to everyone. ;-) I don't really disagree. In particular, I think this is something we should definitely consider as we examine R6RS. > Now, whether each module should load its own shared library is a > different issue. This may depend on the module characteristics: > size, usefulness, C programmability. We also have to find a balance > between lazy initialization (with `dynamic-link') and systematic > initialization. > > Getting back to `(ice-9 i18n)': I'm strongly in favor of keeping this as > a module; I am more inclined to having it in a separate shared library > (because it's not useful to everyone) but I wouldn't mind having it in > `libguile.so'. I'm somewhat inclined to think that the scheme-side module is a good idea, though perhaps it begs more general organizational questions. I'm less certain about whether or not adding small shared library is a good idea. However, in both cases, I need to think a bit more. --=20 Rob Browning rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org; previously @cs.utexas.edu GPG starting 2002-11-03 =3D 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 7= 3A4 _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel