From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dirk Herrmann Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: undefine Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 14:35:26 +0100 (CET) Sender: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1037454574 23668 80.91.224.249 (16 Nov 2002 13:49:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 13:49:34 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18D3KH-00069c-00 for ; Sat, 16 Nov 2002 14:49:33 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18D3J8-0002gy-00; Sat, 16 Nov 2002 08:48:22 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 18D36h-0004j8-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Nov 2002 08:35:31 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 18D36e-0004hO-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Nov 2002 08:35:30 -0500 Original-Received: from sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de ([134.169.132.52]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18D36d-0004g1-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Nov 2002 08:35:28 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (dirk@localhost) by sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA09608 for ; Sat, 16 Nov 2002 14:35:26 +0100 (CET) Original-To: guile-devel@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:1713 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:1713 Hi folks, it seemed that there is consensus that there should not be a possibility to remove a once existing binding from a module (except by creating a new empty module and reloading all the other stuff into that). Thus, I'd like to suggest that we deprecate undefine and its C-level counterpart scm_m_undefine. Best regards, Dirk Herrmann _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel