[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Use core or SRFIs?

From: Zelphir Kaltstahl
Subject: Re: Use core or SRFIs?
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 18:41:33 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0


I see. Thanks, that is what I did so far as well : )

Best regards,


On 10/24/19 6:01 PM, Nala Ginrut wrote:
> Personally, I prefer srfi. But sometimes I mix with RnRS.
> I think it's better to avoid Guile specific things, however, Guile
> provides many good things that the standard doesn't have.
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 11:56 PM Zelphir Kaltstahl
> <address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
>     Hello Guile Users!
>     I have a question regarding usage of SRFIs in Guile code.
>     Sometimes there are core functions, which are also available from an
>     SRFI implementation. One example I am currently dealing with are
>     bitwise
>     operations for integer numbers. There is SRFI 60 and there are the
>     core
>     functions like logand, logior and so on.
>     Usually I tend to think, that using the SRFI implementation in such
>     situation is better, as it is an implementation of a common interface,
>     which other Schemes might also have implemented. Using that makes code
>     more portable to other Schemes. However, I want to be sure, that
>     this is
>     a good way of thinking about it. Are there ever arguments against
>     using
>     an SRFI implementation, when an SRFI implementation provides what
>     I need?
>     Another example are structs. I usually use SRFI 9 to make some
>     structs,
>     instead of the core record or struct type.
>     What do you think?
>     Best regards,
>     Zelphir

reply via email to

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