Noah Lavine <noah.b.lav...@gmail.com> writes: > What you are noticing now is that Guile has some old bits of code that > were not implemented up to the standards we currently have. Since you > seem to be using all the weird corners of Guile, you have the > un-enviable job of going through and finding all of these places so we > can fix them.
I don't actually consider most of the corners that hit me so far all that weird: actually they have been either rather basic, or I've had my nose explicitly rubbed into them by Guile (like with the deprecation warnings). That there is no information about non-literal symbol manipulation in the Guile-1.8 documentation (except mentioning one should use modules, and the C interface SCM_define) is appalling. The Guile-2.0 documentation still does not give any Scheme interfaces, but at least the C interface descriptions for modules make it easier guessing the Scheme interfaces. The Guile maintainers make it a point to say they won't bother with Guile-1.8 documentation, but it is not like Guile-1.8 is going to disappear from software distributions anytime soon due to compatibility issues. > I'm not going to solve this problem, because I don't know how, but I > did want to say that I appreciate you finding these things. It is not > a fun job, but it should be done. It is not fun, but it is not as much a job rather than an impediment. It is certainly not a fun job to hear me crash and burn either. But I doubt that crashing and burning silently, as others apparently do, will be much preferable. -- David Kastrup
