[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-users] Modules and environments

From: Thomas Chust
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] Modules and environments
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 20:53:25 +0200

2009/8/30 Peter Bex <address@hidden>:
> [...]
> I disagree. If this should print #t you should also be able to obtain
> a reference to the macro using (eval 'hello (interaction-environment)),
> but that's not possible since macros are not first-class.
> [...]


that's beside the point: Macros just like modules are syntactic
features of the language. Therefore I think it is quite logical that
macro identifiers and identifiers possibly mangled by the module
system behave similarly in some respects.

Futhermore, environments are an implementation detail of the runtime
system. It is, as I said, maybe not very intuitive if the internal
implementation does not use the same names for variables as your
source code, but it's not a bug. Following your logic one could also
claim that it is a bug that after dlopening a chicken-compiled shared
library from C you cannot access the Scheme bindings under their
Scheme names using dlsym. I think that such behaviour is perfectly


All these theories, diverse as they are, have two things in common: They
explain the observed facts, and they are completely and utterly wrong.
                               -- Terry Pratchett, "The Light Fantastic"

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]