On Sun, 2012-01-15 at 21:11 +0100, Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote: > [desirability of #t => "t" and #f => ""] > > Thanks. Now that i understand the motivation, i think the current > way is fine. You should move this excellent example into the docs.
OK I'll try to find a realistic example to make this more clear. > > Oh yeah, i forgot: I think Make vars should not be accessed by a > > Scheme string, but rather a symbol > > Well, my concern about this is that in GNU make, anyway, we very often > use constructed variable names. I would assume that the same would be > true in Guile procedures, which means it will more be convenient to > store variable names in strings in Guile (it seems to me) so they can be > more easily manipulated. Of course you can always use symbol->string > etc. > > Guile has both ‘string-append’ and ‘symbol-append’ as well as the other > string-manipulation procedures, so the convenience argument is not so > convicing. But why XOR instead of OR? It's no big deal to... > > But is this worth it, to require the Guile user to always perform > this operation when we could do it automatically? > > ...support either string or symbol argument. The current implementation, > i.e., ‘(format #f "$(~A)" X)’ will DTRT. All it needs is documentation. Yes that's true. OK I'll update the documentation. Thanks! -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul D. Smith <psm...@gnu.org> Find some GNU make tips at: http://www.gnu.org http://make.mad-scientist.net "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
