From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Marius Vollmer Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Manual reorganized Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 12:36:36 +0200 Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <87y8nsxcgu.fsf@zip.com.au> <874qpjjqbn.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> <87fz92q3m9.fsf@zip.com.au> <873c2vx63q.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> <87pt5z27c8.fsf@zip.com.au> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1092134237 9849 80.91.224.253 (10 Aug 2004 10:37:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 10:37:17 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Aug 10 12:37:06 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BuU0A-0004iR-00 for ; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 12:37:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BuU3x-0005Jw-Gx for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 06:41:01 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1BuU3p-0005Jq-Hl for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 06:40:53 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1BuU3o-0005Je-Nm for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 06:40:53 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BuU3o-0005Ja-FB for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 06:40:52 -0400 Original-Received: from [129.217.163.1] (helo=mail.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BuTzk-00050R-Qv for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 06:36:41 -0400 Original-Received: from troy.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de (troy.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de [129.217.163.17]) by mail.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8CD838435 for ; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 12:36:37 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: by troy.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de (Postfix, from userid 520) id E8A4CB9A6; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 12:36:36 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: guile-devel@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <87pt5z27c8.fsf@zip.com.au> (Kevin Ryde's message of "Tue, 10 Aug 2004 09:57:11 +1000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1003 (Gnus v5.10.3) Emacs/21.3 (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: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:3934 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:3934 Kevin Ryde writes: > Marius Vollmer writes: >> >> So what about deprecating them and providing scm_c_round and >> scm_c_truncate so that we can eventually use the names scm_round and >> scm_truncate for the C version of the Scheme procedures round and >> truncate? I think that would be the Right Thing. > > I would leave them as they are. The names are unfortunate, but not > actively harmful. Transitions, no matter how long they're spread > over, are always painful and I'd think not worth it in this case. Yeah, right, I can be a bit deprecation-happy at times... but I still think we should remove this wart: one can even argue that the names are somewhat harmful since users might expect the C version of Scheme 'round' to be called 'scm_round'. This works for nearly any other function (and should ideally work for every function that has a C version), but doesn't for 'round'. _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel