Hi, "Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide" <arne_...@web.de> writes: > Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> writes: >>> Why should Wisp be a separate package when other SRFIs are made part >>> of Guile? Your point about maintenance and evolving applies equally >>> to other SRFIs. >> >> That’s a good point. Making it available as (srfi srfi-119) would make >> sense I guess. I need to take a closer look… > > That’s where the documentation and tests are located: > > - test-suite/tests/srfi-119.test > - doc/ref/srfi-modules.texi::5666:@node SRFI-119 > > The language implementation is in (language wisp) because that’s in the > language search path.
Given the complexities in changing the way languages are handled (the required discussions, as we’ve seen in the not yet resolved discussion), would you be OK with keeping the question about adding support for SRFI-119 to Guile separate from the general discussion about language handling? Are there improvements needed besides the ones I did thanks to the review by Maxime or is this good to go? Best wishes, Arne -- Unpolitisch sein heißt politisch sein, ohne es zu merken. draketo.de
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
