Re: [Chicken-users] Module naming conventions in R7RS

[Daniel Carrera]

Thanks.

It's good to see that some schemes are moving toward R7RS and that there is a de-facto shared syntax emerging.

Cheers,

Daniel.

On 8 March 2014 17:35, Seth Alves <address@hidden> wrote:

Among the 4 r7rs schemes I've been working with (chibi chicken gauche sagittarius) there are various ways to refer to the srfis: (srfi-17) (srfi :17) etc.  At this point, they all support (srfi 17), so I've been using that.  I don't really care which form is standard, but I'm excited about reducing use of cond-expand in imports.

    -seth


On 03/08/2014 08:06 AM, Daniel Carrera wrote:

Hello,

The R7RS-small spec does not seem to suggest a naming convention for modules. It merely says that <module name> is a list of identifies. I take that to mean that the following are equally valid:

(import (srfi/17))

(import (srfi 17))

(import (srfi schemers org 17))

(import (org schemers srfi 17))

I suppose that it is better to under-specify than over-specify, but I was wondering if there is a de-facto convention that everyone knows and I missed. The only guidance I found is that Chibi Scheme turns (foo bar biz) into "foo/bar/biz.sld". From that, I think the most logical conventions are:

(import (srfi 17))

(import (org schemers srfi 17))

Has Chicken decided how it wants to name modules?

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.

_______________________________________________
Chicken-users mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users

_______________________________________________
Chicken-users mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users

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