Re: Fixing non-reproducibility in some guile packages

[Christopher Allan Webber <cwebber@dustycloud.org>]

Andy Wingo writes:

> In some future (is it near or far?), the source -> compiled function
> needs additional inputs: checksums or timestamps of "build inputs" or
> so, so that when for-syntax definitions (like macros) change, users of
> those definitions will recompile.  That is a harder problem though.

Ah yeah, I've been bit by this before.  Though, I imagine we'd run into
a problem where we'd never know how to "garbage collect" anything in
~/.cache/guile/ .  "Maybe not a problem", except if you're hacking some files
constantly... :)

Maybe every guile hacker needs to get in the habit of
`rm -rf ~/.cache/guile/' though? :)