From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>
Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: (define-module (foo) #:import (...)), a la r6rs
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 00:50:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87pqh0zwi5.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87hb2cdhc0.fsf@pobox.com> (Andy Wingo's message of "Thu, 10 Nov 2011 00:08:47 +0100")
Hi!
Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> skribis:
> 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? :-)
I find aesthetics important, but phasing out such an important construct
“just” for aesthetics seems harsh to me.
Besides, stuff like #:renamer is strictly more powerful than what
R[67]RS provide, IIRC.
Actually I’m happy with the ways things are currently, so I’m obviously
biased. ;-)
Thanks,
Ludo’.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-11-09 23:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-28 10:37 (define-module (foo) #:import (...)), a la r6rs Andy Wingo
2011-07-28 21:23 ` Ludovic Courtès
2011-11-09 23:08 ` Andy Wingo
2011-11-09 23:50 ` Ludovic Courtès [this message]
2011-12-06 11:30 ` Andy Wingo
2012-01-07 0:23 ` Andy Wingo
2012-01-08 16:28 ` Ludovic Courtès
2012-01-08 16:44 ` Andy Wingo
2011-11-10 12:35 ` David Pirotte
2011-07-28 21:40 ` Mike Gran
2011-07-28 21:52 ` Jose A. Ortega Ruiz
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=87pqh0zwi5.fsf@gnu.org \
--to=ludo@gnu.org \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--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).