[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Chicken-users] hygienic branch (progress report, sort of)

From: Hans Bulfone
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] hygienic branch (progress report, sort of)
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 12:34:04 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09)


On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 04:52:17PM +0200, felix winkelmann wrote:

> It would be helpful if the chicken users and hackers take a moment
> to consider whether this is acceptable and right, or whether we
> should keep the current system, which is less scalable in terms of
> modularity, but nevertheless quite stable.

to me it sounds like the way to go; i always wanted to have a module
system in the core that can be used by eggs without worrying about
dependencies or incompatibilities.  the same is true for a hygienic
macro system i guess ... but i haven't used hygienic macros a lot

my question is: will it still be possible to write a (er-) macro that
creates new identifiers like define-record does? from previous
postings i got differing impressions.
i know it's not considered good style to do that but it saved me a lot
of typing in the directfb egg and those macros are only used
internally and not made available to user code.


reply via email to

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