From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Thompson, David" Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: Core Guile bindings Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 15:20:30 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1476300064 14062 195.159.176.226 (12 Oct 2016 19:21:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 19:21:04 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "guile-user@gnu.org" To: Panicz Maciej Godek Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 12 21:21:01 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-user@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1buP5D-0002Ye-Fj for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 21:20:55 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35359 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1buP5C-0004SV-6p for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 15:20:54 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58634) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1buP4q-0004Ro-9d for guile-user@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 15:20:33 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1buP4p-00064T-9S for guile-user@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 15:20:32 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-qt0-x22e.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22e]:33239) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1buP4p-00064J-4l for guile-user@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 15:20:31 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-qt0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id s49so24907003qta.0 for ; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 12:20:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=worcester-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/SubDx7KTEE37NZccameR7T7zjzzaiiN0JQMwMtZZBc=; b=EQmKkJwXzh5wadbnRaoo5+qkzZvvUj9/4SPs2Bd1iPPcgelYRtcja2xdkkYjBuRovv N3ycd0hg8ozSkIpd0bdSJOGQi1NJmQN2llpbWezUibpu86H3Reg5gKTqTopn+nIkydtZ ndhK8duU6/EwBodCS+uIRswvw6UEaOQgcVcDdSrrTR0pyZZsGXqsVpFr4dNYCektGrvg hjcqvXUmM0ywVs+W+QDLiN5Y4IZ7wMWLhLIvK8KIxC1oTl3oI+S1/tI4hAhH7LjC7XE6 q7MWMA01OzUbu3a5V5BOn708Au1zu8zk7T5EdKhVYEbwgdSjM4Ejl/IQYqzvCt8JZHfO pauA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/SubDx7KTEE37NZccameR7T7zjzzaiiN0JQMwMtZZBc=; b=N+ibE/vwqpayQWc5YA3xslQrj43+6sAyCxXDAD3xkR0U09K2dWvU0MZaogppduz0TJ ITxVMrrWnTAsxR/lmEY3FImBhKbrkLgQt3VlkPt6j4BBZjpGKu4sr5F6W7nWQGXClxzt Vqev9HAet1dhczuK+GOIVD3WDMMZqF6s9TqyfmEFIJf0G5bWBvCHCozjEgXS4CMbCwkw vin8919DIn6Qz8tnAXnB38lNPyBTLxZyRgoIB6lWamw/85uXrUsst9LR5VNZucSxywiX 2OzxGPWH7zpPliqQ4YGvGu3moyrXsS9q6NKcrIMQgErftVQ843vIKi/kIBrUHkOZoFM2 de8w== X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RldEqdhNbUKiTUmit9hyK4FnVPB6U7eONuastdDBzdXBp3ZowLX49CViwDSwpUC2UsrmjJZxGfdFEhA2TvK X-Received: by 10.200.55.59 with SMTP id o56mr2752260qtb.65.1476300030671; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 12:20:30 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.55.43.34 with HTTP; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 12:20:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22e X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "guile-user" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:12946 Archived-At: On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Panicz Maciej Godek wrote: > > > 2016-10-12 20:21 GMT+02:00 Thompson, David : >> >> >> My understanding is that these symbols have been part of the default >> environment for so long that a lot of code would break if they were >> removed, so they will be staying for the foreseeable future. >> > > On the other hand, the fix would usually be trivial (just one use-modules > clause), and besides I don't think that Guile has ever had a tradition of > worrying too much about backwards compatibility. The Guile maintainers care very much about backwards compatibility, from what I've seen over the last few years. - Dave