Re: illegal uses of define in guile

[tomas]

On Sun, Nov 03, 2002 at 05:28:35PM +0100, Marius Vollmer wrote:
> address@hidden writes:
> 
> > On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 05:22:03PM +0200, Dirk Herrmann wrote:
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > Summarized:
> > > * The compiler must be able to emit code that allows references to
> > >   identifiers to be looked up at use time (that is, in the executor).
> > > * The executor must be able to handle definitions.
> > > * Once a binding has been referenced, the binding should not change.
> > 
> > Is this going to be enforced at run time somehow [...]

> It will be enforced at run-time [...]

> When you do quirky things, would be OK to require you to reload code
> that is affected by this?  Guile can help by offering a list of files
> that would need to be reloaded.

Yes, that sounds fine: you don't pay a very high penalty in the `fast
path' (i.e. in the optimized code), but you get the flexibility if you
are willing to pay the price. It is clear that you have to reload things
if bindings change, I think.

Thanks
-- tomas