[Chicken-users] Re: Proposed procedure movement in Chicken 4

[Aleksej Saushev]

  Hi!

Kon Lovett <address@hidden> writes:

> These are planned changes to the unit structure of Chicken 4:
>
> 1) Unit utils 'read-all' -> Unit extras.
> 2) Unit utils 'qs', 'system*', 'compile-file-options', &
> compile-
> file' -> Unit files.
> 3) Unit extras random stuff -> Unit utils
> 4) Unit files pathname stuff -> Unit pathname
> 5) Unit extras -> Unit io
> 6) Unit data-structures functionals+combinators -> combinators
>
> I want to perform 1 - 3 soon, and 4 - 6 after. Comments?

I've read all the above, and I still don't think it is good idea.
While it may clean things up, but it causes unnecessary pain when
maintaining software in production. You are going to rename 6 units
or even break them up into smaller grains and rearrange units' content.
In plain words, you break things up and reassemble them anew.

Consider it doesn't assemble in my domain. What do you propose as
conversion or fallback plan for practical users like me?
Can you provide any compatibility layer so that I don't go over the
source, checking each one reference and replacing it if necessary?
Maybe, maintain compatibility warnings "unit XXX is deprecated,
convert to unit YYY"?

I understand that this clobbers the source, and it is not so hackish,
but this may and does kill any will to use Scheme in production.


JFYI, I wholehartedly support Peter in that point that shell quoting
stuff should be replaced with tools around execve/execvp where possible.


-- 
CE3OH...