From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Proposal: allow "guile foo.scm" Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 10:39:34 -0500 Organization: What did you have in mind? A short, blunt, human pyramid? Message-ID: References: <1100197586.19830.125.camel@localhost> <87vfcbdqwg.fsf@imladris.homeunix.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1100274074 29488 80.91.229.6 (12 Nov 2004 15:41:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 15:41:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 12 16:40:47 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 1CSdXa-0003GE-00 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:40:46 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CSdg8-0006Qq-9P for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 10:49:36 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CSdfY-00069O-HY for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 10:49:00 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CSdfX-00068p-Fe for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 10:48:59 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CSdfW-00068E-Jy for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 10:48:58 -0500 Original-Received: from [129.22.104.46] (helo=mirapoint1.tis.cwru.edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.34) id 1CSdWU-00048t-Qw for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 10:39:38 -0500 Original-Received: from multivac.cwru.edu (multivac.ITS.CWRU.Edu [129.22.114.26]) by mirapoint1.tis.cwru.edu (MOS 3.5.4-GR) with SMTP id DDE32579; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 10:39:37 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (qmail 20827 invoked by uid 500); 12 Nov 2004 15:39:58 -0000 Original-To: "Jose A. Ortega Ruiz" In-Reply-To: <87vfcbdqwg.fsf@imladris.homeunix.org> (Jose A. Ortega Ruiz's message of "Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:32:31 +0100") Mail-Copies-To: nobody Mail-Followup-To: "Jose A. Ortega Ruiz" , guile-devel Original-Lines: 18 User-Agent: Gnus/5.110003 (No Gnus v0.3) 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: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:4378 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:4378 "Jose A. Ortega Ruiz" wrote: > IMHO, the best way would be to support SRFI-22 (Running Scheme scripts > in Unix, http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-22/srfi-22.html), This has also come up before. IIRC, the consensus (or at least one of the suggestions) was that if this were to be supported at all, it should be in a separate binary, not guile itself (for backwards compatibility, and because guile's #!...!# mechanism is more flexible). > [1] Actually, i'm oversimplifying here: the SRFI suggests also > concrete names for the interpreter (instead of just 'guile'), > according to its compliance to RnRS. Another reason to make it a separate binary, then. paul _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel