From: Dirk Herrmann <dirk@sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de>
Cc: hanwen@cs.uu.nl, guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: GC rewrite, first version.
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 22:11:48 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.05.10207292204500.25477-100000@sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <871y9n3ixa.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org>
On Sun, 28 Jul 2002, Rob Browning wrote:
> Han-Wen <hanwen@cs.uu.nl> writes:
>
> > * I've split gc.c in a lot of files, and a private header file. The
> > formerly static functions are now exported, but with the scm_ prefix
> >
> > I think the prefix scm_i_ is utterly unreadable. I decided against
> > using it. The header file is not `exported' so that should make it
> > clear that the structures are internal.
>
> I believe there was a discussion about this a while back, and although
> I'm fine with the idea of private headers (in fact, I tend to think
> that from the end-user's perspective they may be a bit cleaner), that
> wasn't the consensus. People preferred the scm_i_ approach.
>
> So while in general I'm not conceptually opposed to private headers
> instead of the scm_i_ prefix, I think whatever we do we should do it
> consistently.
The problem with private headers is, that sometimes you like to introduce
some macros / function references which themselves are not part of the
API, but which you need to implement some macros (or - in the not too far
future - inline functions) that are part of the API. This, however, means
that these have to be part of the public headers. This is one of the
reasons we decided for the scm_i_ and SCM_I_ prefixes.
Best regards,
Dirk
_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-07-29 20:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-07-27 22:54 GC rewrite, first version Han-Wen
2002-07-28 16:40 ` Rob Browning
2002-07-29 20:11 ` Dirk Herrmann [this message]
2002-07-29 21:04 ` Rob Browning
2002-07-29 22:05 ` Han-Wen
2002-07-31 17:03 ` Dirk Herrmann
2002-07-31 18:02 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2002-07-31 21:15 ` Rob Browning
2002-08-01 9:20 ` Release Guile, now ;-) [was:] " rm
2002-08-01 16:27 ` Rob Browning
2002-08-01 16:44 ` rm
2002-08-01 18:37 ` Sergey Poznyakoff
2002-08-01 22:21 ` Rob Browning
2002-08-02 6:09 ` Sergey Poznyakoff
2002-08-02 14:36 ` Rob Browning
2002-08-02 17:29 ` Sergey Poznyakoff
2002-08-02 18:10 ` Bruce Korb
2002-08-02 19:50 ` Rob Browning
2002-08-03 7:13 ` Sergey Poznyakoff
2002-08-04 20:43 ` Bruce Korb
2002-08-04 20:57 ` Sergey Poznyakoff
2002-08-01 22:40 ` Rob Browning
2002-08-02 9:35 ` rm
2002-08-02 11:59 ` rm
2002-08-02 15:00 ` Rob Browning
2002-08-02 14:50 ` Rob Browning
2002-08-01 9:59 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2002-08-01 8:46 ` Marius Vollmer
2002-07-31 18:46 ` Neil Jerram
2002-08-01 9:58 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2002-07-28 16:51 ` Michael Livshin
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=Pine.GSO.4.05.10207292204500.25477-100000@sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de \
--to=dirk@sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=hanwen@cs.uu.nl \
/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).