On 5/20/05, Michele Simionato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 5/20/05, felix winkelmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I usually recommend > > > > (require-extension match) > > > > instead of `(require 'match)', though. > > Is there any practical difference? >
`require' works at run-time. But in compiled code you want to have the macro definitions at compile-time. `require-extension' knows about "special" extensions (like match) and handles syntactic extensions of eggs (provided the setup script adds the necessary properties at installation). `require' is sometimes useful when you want to load extensions lazily at runtime, or when you just need a "load-once" operation. `require-for-syntax' is sometimes useful when you have situations where a syntactic extension needs to load support code at compile- time. One should _always_ use `require-extension' (it also expands into `(declare (uses ...))' forms for the builtin extensions like srfi-1, etc.), since it usually just does "the right thing". And finally: `use' is just an alias for `require-extension'. cheers, felix _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
