Re: GC rewrite, first version.

[Dirk Herrmann]

On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Han-Wen wrote:

> address@hidden writes:
> > Dirk Herrmann <address@hidden> writes:
> > 
> > > The problem with private headers is, that sometimes you like to
> > > introduce some macros / function references which themselves are not
> > > part of the API, but which you need to implement some macros (or -
> > > in the not too far future - inline functions) that are part of the
> > > API.  This, however, means that these have to be part of the public
> > > headers.  This is one of the reasons we decided for the scm_i_ and
> > > SCM_I_ prefixes.
> > 
> > Oh right -- thanks -- I remember that now.  That was a pretty good
> > reason :>
> 
> Well, if any of the private GC move to public headers,  we can always
> insert the I. 

Well, it has been said that as long as you are in the hacking phase, you
shouldn't care about policy and naming, and I agree.  And, I think that
your changes will be a great step forward for guile.

However, when you are going to add your stuff to CVS I think it is
important that it does not deliberately violate conventions that have been
agreed upon.  Feel free to start a discussion about improving the
convention, but until the decision is made to change things the way you
like it, please follow the current convention when changing code in CVS.

Best regards,
Dirk Herrmann