Andy Wingo writes:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon 05 Dec 2011 15:54, Andy Wingo writes:
>
>> On Mon 05 Dec 2011 09:11, David Kastrup writes:
>>
>>> David Kastrup writes:
>>>
> (symbol-set! #f (string->symbol name) value)
(module-define! (current-module) (string->symbol name) value)
>>
>> Indeed, th
Hi,
On Mon 05 Dec 2011 15:54, Andy Wingo writes:
> On Mon 05 Dec 2011 09:11, David Kastrup writes:
>
>> David Kastrup writes:
>>
(symbol-set! #f (string->symbol name) value)
>>> (module-define! (current-module) (string->symbol name) value)
>
> Indeed, the module system needs better docume
Hello David,
On Mon 05 Dec 2011 09:11, David Kastrup writes:
> David Kastrup writes:
>
>>> (symbol-set! #f (string->symbol name) value)
>> (module-define! (current-module) (string->symbol name) value)
Indeed, the module system needs better documentation.
>> Is this somebody's idea of a joke?
David Kastrup writes:
> David Kastrup writes:
>
>> The module system documentation provides _no_ _clue_ _whatsoever_ about
>> how something like
>> (symbol-set! #f (string->symbol name) value)
>> could be replaced. In fact, the module system documentation provides
>> _no_ _clue_ _whatsoever_ ho
David Kastrup writes:
> The module system documentation provides _no_ _clue_ _whatsoever_ about
> how something like
> (symbol-set! #f (string->symbol name) value)
> could be replaced. In fact, the module system documentation provides
> _no_ _clue_ _whatsoever_ how to actually access module vari
The module system documentation provides _no_ _clue_ _whatsoever_ about
how something like
(symbol-set! #f (string->symbol name) value)
could be replaced. In fact, the module system documentation provides
_no_ _clue_ _whatsoever_ how to actually access module variables short
of calling eval on li
