[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: (define-module (foo) #:import (...)), a la r6rs

From: Jose A. Ortega Ruiz
Subject: Re: (define-module (foo) #:import (...)), a la r6rs
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 23:52:03 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (darwin)

On Thu, Jul 28 2011, Andy Wingo wrote:

> Hi,
> I was hacking on Dorodango today, in a script that happened to have a
> Guile-style (define-module ...) block, and I was importing pieces of an
> rnrs library.  Then I needed to update the import set to provide what
> was needed.  In the middle of making a keyboard macro to add
> #:use-module before the library names, I realized that `library' is
> actually a lot better in this regard, in that you just have one `import'
> block, and all the libraries are listed there without having a prefix on
> each one.
> So what do you all think about:
>   (define-module (foo)
>     #:import ((bar)
>               (only (baz) qux foo)
>               ...))
> Or even:
>   (define-module (foo)
>     (import (bar)
>             (only (baz) qux foo)
>             ...))

fwiw, i like the second form better (looks more schemish to me), and i agree
both forms are an improvement over #:use-module.

I don't necessarily agree with everything I say.
 -Marshall McLuhan (1911-1980)

reply via email to

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