Neil Jerram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [... initialize-packages vs. config.scm approach ...]
I just thought of one more argument that favours initialize-packages,
namely that initialize-packages allows execution of arbitrary code to
initialize a package (whereas config.scm would only modify
%l
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Neil Jerram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I think this rules out any kind of iteration through a .d directory
>> from init.scm. Apologies for not seeing this consideration before.
>
> Agreed. Guile already takes almost two seconds to start up on m
Alan Grover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Actually, your comments are interesting, since you assumed I meant a
> lazy-list at the per-header level.
Yes.
> Hmmm. Weird. Even intriguing: why read the rest of the request if
> you get to a header that you tells you to give up?
That's not a mainline
