From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Thien-Thi Nguyen Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: rfc (define-module ... #:use-modules ...) Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2007 11:59:22 +0200 Message-ID: <877im0lg1x.fsf@ambire.localdomain> References: <87przvnf6i.fsf@ambire.localdomain> <200710052347.l95Nlojq003807@fcs13.keithdiane.us> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1191664893 27626 80.91.229.12 (6 Oct 2007 10:01:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2007 10:01:33 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-user@gnu.org To: Keith Wright Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 06 12:01:31 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-user@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Ie6TS-00011S-KM for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 12:01:30 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ie6TN-0006lf-Qu for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 06:01:25 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ie6So-0006aZ-AX for guile-user@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 06:00:50 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ie6Sm-0006a8-QQ for guile-user@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 06:00:49 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ie6Sm-0006a5-Jm for guile-user@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 06:00:48 -0400 Original-Received: from ppp-56-36.21-151.libero.it ([151.21.36.56] helo=ambire.localdomain) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ie6Sm-0007mM-23 for guile-user@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 06:00:48 -0400 Original-Received: from ttn by ambire.localdomain with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Ie6RO-0003sP-6E; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 11:59:22 +0200 In-Reply-To: <200710052347.l95Nlojq003807@fcs13.keithdiane.us> (Keith Wright's message of "Fri\, 5 Oct 2007 19\:47\:50 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/23.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-Detected-Kernel: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:6193 Archived-At: () Keith Wright () Fri, 5 Oct 2007 19:47:50 -0400 It would be heartening to read that the maintainer of the fork wants to build toward the other branch were it not for the cynical suspicion that that "harmonize" is like "bi-pertisan"; it means everyone should do it my way, even if they fundamentally disagree with me. for me, it means everyone interested should say what they would (or would not) do and then if there is concensus (after some refinement), i follow. if there is no concensus, i muddle through the best i can (as always). from the sound of the responses thus far, this is the most likely outcome. If you want to harmonize, maybe both branches could think about implementing R6RS library forms. the library body is specified to be included in the `library' form. OTOH, `define-module' is a peer top-level form to the library body. how would you reconcile these approaches? thi _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user