Hi, Kevin Ryde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is it supposed to work to set the default duplicates handling to an > empty list? Why not, but we need to define the semantics. > It seems to work in 1.8, but in the head it's giving > > => Unbound variable: map In `resolve_duplicate_binding ()', we could initialize RESULT to VAR2, for instance (which would behave like `last', I think). > I had this in my program as a global setting > > (default-duplicate-binding-handler '()) > > Either way if empty isn't allowed it'd be nice to throw an error > immediately, the same as a bogus handler name symbol does. > > The effect I wanted was no work at all done for duplicates checking. > Modules can override/extend the core by shadowing, but I'm confident > there's no clashes between my modules and don't want time spent looking > at that. Or is '(last) the policy I should be asking for to get that > non-checking effect? I think we could do the above change and document that `()' is equivalent to `(last)'. What do you think? Thanks, Ludovic. _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
