Hi, On Sun 19 Feb 2012 15:10, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> skribis: > >> On Fri 17 Feb 2012 23:49, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: >> >>> Would it work to let the user call it themself if needed, like: >>> >>> (add-to-load-path (dirname (canonicalize-path (current-filename)))) >> >> I would rather have current-filename do a >> >> (or (false-if-exception (canonicalize-path p)) p) >> >> Current-filename sounds like it should do the right thing, if possible. > > I think it’s often undesirable. > > Suppose you want to use ‘current-filename’ in an ‘assert’ macro, for > instance: what you want is a hint, not an absolute path, since that path > is likely to be invalid at the time you see it (for instance, it could > point to the source tree on a build machine of your distro.) > > Furthermore, including absolute paths by default makes builds > non-deterministic: two users would get different binaries, just because > they built things under a different directory. > > Thus, I’d rather let users call ‘canonicalize-path’ when they know what > they’re doing, and know that they actually need it. > > WDYT? I'm fine with that, but I think you are concerned more about code in modules (compiled in one location, installed and run from another) than for local scripts. See Neil's use case here: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel/13440/focus=13621 Can we do something that makes sense for both cases? For example, we might canonicalize-path only if we don't find the filename within the current load path. Andy -- http://wingolog.org/
