Marius Vollmer wrote:

Hmm.  There are two things here that might want a warning: redefining
something that was a macro as a variable;

Sounds good; and vice versa? By the way, has your idea about having "identifier -> macro" instead of "identifier -> variable -> macro" been implemented yet?

and shadowing a core definition.

I'm not sure I like the implication of "core", as it suggests different behaviour for privileged Guile code, vs. different layers of user code.

Isn't the rule we want "whenever a new definition shadows an existing definition in a module, and the existing definition did not originate in the current module"? This rule would also avoid giving unwanted warnings when an edited module is reloaded.

        Neil


_______________________________________________
Guile-user mailing list
Guile-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user

Reply via email to