[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: the module system ?
From: |
Ian Grant |
Subject: |
Re: the module system ? |
Date: |
Wed, 07 Mar 2001 10:01:53 +0000 |
> > as you see, it works perfectly fine, so why does it not work from a
> > guile listener?
>
> Scripts run in a different module (guile) from the module for
> interactive use (guile-user). The reason is that the environment for
> interactive use is augmented with bindings for debugging, procedure
> documentation etc. We don't want to load all of that for scripts,
> because we want startup time to be as small as possible.
>
> But this *should* not make any difference in your case.
>
> It just looks terribly weird. I can't think of any reason for the
> difference. It's probably not a Guile bug, though.
It's probably a guile-pg bug. The module is defined like this:
(if (not (defined? 'pg-guile-pg-loaded)) ;; Unless already loaded (static) ...
(dynamic-call "init_postgres" (dynamic-link "libpostgres.so")))
(define-module (database postgres))
(define-public (pg-guile-pg-module-config-stamp) "@GUILE_PG_STAMP@")
(define-public (pg-guile-pg-module-version) "@VERSION@")
(define-public (pg-guile-pg-module-rcsid)
"$Id: postgres.scm.in,v 1.3 2000/05/31 11:59:07 iang Exp $")
The idea being that I avoid having to explicitly list all the C module exports
by running the C module init function in the current module. It's not
entirely clear to me why this fails in David's case though.
Ian
--
Ian Grant, Computer Lab., New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge
Phone: +44 1223 334420 Personal e-mail: iang at pobox dot com
- the module system ?, David Pirotte, 2001/03/06
- Re: the module system ?, Martin Grabmueller, 2001/03/06
- Re: the module system ?, David Pirotte, 2001/03/06
- Re: the module system ?, Mikael Djurfeldt, 2001/03/06
- Re: the module system ?, David Pirotte, 2001/03/06
- Re: the module system ?,
Ian Grant <=
- Re: the module system ?, Mikael Djurfeldt, 2001/03/07
- Guile-pg modules bug fix., Ian Grant, 2001/03/08
- Re: the module system ?, Ian Grant, 2001/03/08