Am Mittwoch, den 29.01.2020, 07:01 -0800 schrieb d...@gnu.org: > On 2020/01/29 12:20:10, mail5 wrote: > > Unfortunately I haven't set up a build system on my new computer > > yet, > so this > > patch is not tested locally at all, so I'm humbly waiting for the > automated > > tests to succeed or fail ... > > I don't like the "use-modules clauses adjusted accordingly". I don't > think it makes sense readjusting use-modules clauses all the time > while > we are deciding on the final module organisation, so I'd strongly > suggest first biting the bullet and deciding on a syntax for a > user-level command able to load Scheme modules without further > options, > and then introduce that command. In that manner, future directory > organisations (which are almost certain to come) will not affect the > source of user-level documents any more. > > https://codereview.appspot.com/567140045/
Maybe I'm missing something, but AFAICS there will always be the need for a module path like (ice-9 regex), or (scm display-lily). We will have that with *any* user-facing load syntax. My thought was to separate the two different types of .scm files in that directory, and that could of course also be achieved by moving the *other* files, those that are loaded with ly:load from lily.scm to a different directory. Or - of course - I can simply drop this and add new modules to that same directory for now. >