No even if you have cross module inlining you will still be able to tell i
a module will allow inlining or not else you will break quite a lot of nice
scheme idioms.
This means that this is indeed future proof.

On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 10:50 PM Linus Björnstam <
linus.bjornstam@veryfast.biz> wrote:

> If guile ever gets cross-module Inlining in even the simplest form, this
> will break. This kind of inlining is probably the most secure one to rely
> on ever (my for loops rely on it, for example). A more future proof option
> is maybe to (set! ...) A variable within the same module, which makes it
> implicitly boxed. Slow unless guile is able to do unboxing...
>
> Ludo used the trick here:
> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guile.git/commit/?id=bf1f5422bdb364667d6761dd73454558d6dbf895
>
> --
>   Linus Björnstam
>
> On Wed, 12 Feb 2020, at 18:44, Stefan Israelsson Tampe wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Current guile inlines even variables exposed in the module interface,
> > and I understand that we must live with that and code around it. So
> > here is a few tips how to mitigate it.
> >
> > The simplest way is to put this definition in a module:
> > ------------------------
> > (define-module (syntax not-inline)
> >  #:export (not-inline))
> >
> > (cond-expand
> >  (guile-3.0
> >  (define (not-inline x) x))
> >  ((or (guile-2.0 guile-2.2)
> >  (define-syntax-rule (not-inline x) x)))
> >
> > -------------------------------------
> > And then in another module do,
> >
> > (use-modules (syntax not-inline))
> > (define variable (not-inline 12))
> > (define function (not-inline (lambda () ...)))
> > etc
> >
> > This is also an option (not perfect but you get the gist)
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > (define-module (syntax define-not-inlinable)
> >  #:use-module (syntax not-inline)
> >  #:export (inline define lambda define* lambda* define-values)
> > (define inline (lambda (x) x))
> > (define-syntax define
> >  (syntax-rules (inline)
> >  ((define (f . x) . code)
> >  (define f (not-inline (lambda x . code)))
> >  ((define f (inline x))
> >  (define f x))
> >  ((define f x)
> >  (define f (not-inlinable x))))
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > using this module will make all usual define not inlineable and to
> > enable inlining you would
> > explicitly ask for it like
> >
> > (define f (inline (lambda (x) (+ x 10))))
> >
> > If there is a need for this I can write the modules and expose it on
> > the intertubes.
> >
> > WDYT
> >
> > /Stefan
> >
> >
> >
> >
>