Re: Loading Guile `Extensions'

[Marius Vollmer]

thi <address@hidden> writes:

> thanks very much for the explanation.  i think this kind of summary
> should go into the documentation somewhere.

Hmm, it's in NEWS, but not that long winded.  In the Reference Manual,
I wouldn't want to mention the `old ways' too much, if at all.

> if included, it would help tame the angry hordes of curmudgeons that
> i see myself exemplifying. :->

Are that many people using scm_register_module_xxx?

> well one principle i like to think about and sometimes practice is
> when simplifying a system (as is the case here), to re-implement the
> more complex form using the simpler primitives.

Yep, that's a good idea.  In this case, we would replace two calls to
dynamic-link, dynamic-call with load-extension.  I don't think that
that would be worth it...