Re: [Chicken-users] ideas

[felix]

> Currently, I think the overall style looks more like an appendix to a
> manual right now. :)

This is unfortunately correct.

>
> Maybe you should have sections in the manual that explain how you'd do
> particular common things in Chicken. Like a chapter on File I/O that shows
> some examples of ports (but not many) and many more examples on the posix
> interface. Right now, it is just a big list of annotated functions with no
> overarching goal is how to approach chicken or use the facilities it has.

Right. Its really just a reference. Perhaps we should split the
documentation
into three parts: an introduction, with comprehensive how-tos; a reference
manual;
and an internals/FFI section.

> Speaking of, why are some posix calls named differently from their C
> counterparts? Any good reason or no? If not, would it be possible to
> rename/deprecate them and change it to be what POSIXly oriented people
> would expect them to be named?

Because the POSIX names are somewhat cryptic and don't fit into
the overall naming conventions used in Scheme. But there are only names
anyway, nothing prevents you from writing something like

(define select file-select)
(define open file-open)
...


cheers,
felix