Holger Peters writes:
> Hi,
>
>> This is as intended.
>
> Do you have a rationale for this intention? I have been thinking
> about this for weeks now, and I still cannot come up with a scenario
> when I would like this behaviour. That is if I'd load a lua-on-guile
> REPL, I wouldn't like to ha
Hi,
This is as intended.
Do you have a rationale for this intention? I have been thinking
about this for weeks now, and I still cannot come up with a scenario
when I would like this behaviour. That is if I'd load a lua-on-guile
REPL, I wouldn't like to have Lua symbols missing and Scheme sym
Is this supposed to work for r7rs ? I get:
scheme@(guile-user)> (import (scheme base))
scheme@(guile-user)> ,m (scheme base)
scheme@(scheme base)>
Display all 2081 possibilities? (y or n)
On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 2:49 AM Linus Björnstam
wrote:
>
> The guile module used at the repl is indeed the g
The guile module used at the repl is indeed the guile-user module. I would look
at how the elisp language is implemented. It switches the repl to the elisp
module where no guile bindings are present.
This is the same as doing ,m (module name) at the repl.
--
Linus Björnstam
On Sat, 7 Nov 2
holger.pet...@posteo.de writes:
> It seems that in the REPL, Guile injects the `guile-user' module
> directly whereas when called with `-s` and a script guile uses the
> module provided with `#:make-default-environment'. That seems strange
> because overall I would expect REPL environments and no
