Hi! Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> writes:
> Q: I have a module that overrides a core binding (like > make-hash-table). Should I #:export that binding or #:replace it? > > A: #:replace. Presumably the user knows what she is doing when she > uses your module. If she really cares she can change the duplicate > bindings resolution mechanism to disallow such imports. +1 But... The manual currently says otherwise (info "(guile) Creating Guile Modules"): `#:replace LIST' Export all identifiers in LIST (a list of symbols or pairs of symbols) and mark them as "replacing bindings". [...] This is useful for modules that export bindings that have the same name as core bindings. `#:replace', in a sense, lets Guile know that the module _purposefully_ replaces a core binding. It is important to note, however, that this binding replacement is confined to the name space of the module user. In other words, the value of the core binding in question remains unchanged for other modules. For instance, SRFI-39 exports a binding named `current-input-port' (*note SRFI-39::) that is a function which is upwardly compatible with the core `current-input-port' function. Therefore, SRFI-39 exports its version with `#:replace'. SRFI-19, on the other hand, exports its own version of `current-time' (*note SRFI-19 Time::) which is not compatible with the core `current-time' function (*note Time::). Therefore, SRFI-19 does not use `#:replace'. According to your rationale, SRFI-19 would #:replace ‘current-time’. (See also http://www.mail-archive.com/guile-devel@gnu.org/msg00479.html and http://www.mail-archive.com/guile-devel@gnu.org/msg00469.html .) Thanks, Ludo’.