Re: [Chicken-users] Question about (use numbers)

[Daniel Carrera]

On 2 March 2014 17:00, Matt Gushee <address@hidden> wrote:

> Does this mean that I am loading the module wrong?

No. The numbers egg redefines all the standard arithmetic 'operators'
(quotes because, as you are probably aware, they are really functions
that just happen to be represented with the symbols we typically call
operators) to work with large integers, rationals, and complex
numbers. I think the main reason for the warnings is to make you aware
of unintentional naming conflicts, but in this case the redefinitions
are deliberate and should not cause any errors.

Ok. Does this also mean that there is no way to suppress these messages (without also suppressing a similar message if I accidentally redefine something I shouldn't)?

 

> Incidentally, what is the difference between (require-extension xyz) and
> (use xyz)? Which one should I use?

If I'm not mistaken they are completely equivalent in Chicken Scheme.
'require-extension' is conformant with SRFI-55
(http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-55/srfi-55.html), so in principle it is
more portable. However, according to
<http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-implementers.html>, only 6 Scheme
implementations support SRFI-55, so I'm not sure that gives you much
of an advantage.

Ok. Thanks. I don't think I care about SRFI-55 because presumably Scheme dialects will gradually move to R7RS and we'll all write (import xyz) instead.

Cheers,

Daniel.

-- 

When an engineer says that something can't be done, it's a code phrase that means it's not fun to do.