Kevin Ryde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Greg Troxel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > You are right, but if you object to going from what we have to what I
> > posted, I don't see your point.
>
> I was hoping the issue could be killed for good, ie. impervious to
> anything guile.init might do in the future :-).
My latest attempt comes as close as I think we can.
> > slib needs to define the API that guile.init has to provide for
> > users for slib.
>
> I suspect it's not that formal, but rather the init files are only
> those bits which have turned out to vary between supported schemes.
> The last change for instance moved bits out of the common files into
> the init files.
I think you are right. But it's currently hard to tell which
definitions have to be exported from the module. But....
> > (define base:define define)
> > (define define
> > (procedure->memoizing-macro
> > (lambda (exp env)
> > (cons (if (= 1 (length env)) 'define-public 'base:define) (cdr exp)))))
> >
> > which I think results in all the defines in the file being
> > define-public.
>
> Yes, for top-level defines. Dunno what that's actually meant to do
> though.
I think the idea is to cooperate with guile's module system and export
all the top-level procedures.
> Incidentally the test seems to fail in the guile cvs, different
> implementation of env or something.
I suppose we either need to fix guile cvs or get some new code for
slib to do what it needs. Here's results from top-level interactive
in a 1.6.8 release candidate.
guile> (use-modules (ice-9 format))
guile> (define (a exp env) (format "exp ~A\nenv ~A\n" exp env))
guile> a
#<procedure a (exp env)>
guile> (define b (procedure->macro a))
guile> b
#<macro a>
guile> (b 'foo 'bar)
"exp (b (quote foo) (quote bar))
env (#<eval-closure 80c0b50>)
"
--
Greg Troxel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
_______________________________________________
Guile-user mailing list
Guile-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user
