[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: define and modules
From: |
Dirk Herrmann |
Subject: |
Re: define and modules |
Date: |
Mon, 4 Nov 2002 22:32:41 +0100 (CET) |
On 3 Nov 2002, Marius Vollmer wrote:
> Dirk Herrmann <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > Great. However, currently, guile's handling of defines is buggy or at
> > least in contrast to R5RS. Changing it would break existing code as shown
> > in the following two examples:
>
> I see. I'd say we don't need to slavishly follow R5RS here since R5RS
> does not talk about modules. And we don't need to keep our current,
> mostly accidental semantics either. So there is opportunity to do the
> Right Thing...
OK, talking about the right thing: How should guile react to the
following code:
(define define-private define)
This is done in boot9.scm. Should this be allowed?
Best regards,
Dirk Herrmann