Re: [Chicken-users] to "uses" or not to "uses"

[Peter Bex]

On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 11:05:49PM +0100, Jörg F. Wittenberger wrote:
> For some reason, several - though not all - procedures
> turn out to be undefined (e.g. resolve to an unbound value
> and then segfault accordingly).
> 

Segfaults should only happen if aggressive optimizations are
enabled.

> To me this looks (at the moment) as if the uses clause enforce
> the correct initialization order, while the imports just declare
> what's seen by the compiler.

Sounds like you may have some phasing issues; definitions in a
module aren't seen by macros defined in the same module, unless
you define-for-syntax them.  Converting old-style Scheme into
modules is kind of tricky, since with older code you could be a
lot sloppier about which definitions are available when.  Now you
have to be precise about at which level a definition exists.

However, without some concrete examples, we can only guess why
stuff isn't working for you.

Cheers,
Peter
-- 
http://www.more-magic.net