On 8/23/07, Sunnan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > felix winkelmann wrote: > > I agree with Benedikt that dependencies should be kept at a minimum. > > It starts with simple sharing of code but quickly everything ends up in > > a tangle of dependencies that no one can comprehend. > What's the alternative? Should "tool" implement its own args > documentation? Should array-lib implement its own miscmacros?
It should drop the args-doc dependency, even if that means a reduction of functionality. Keeping things simple, comprehensible and self contained (at least as much as possible) and use small, well defined, building blocks. > > Syntax-case is low-level, srfi-42 and miscmacros are control > structures... This is part of what lisp is to me; layers upon layers of > code. Right, this is also why all Lisp systems end up in large entangled blobs that no one can build reproducibly, and which can not be cross/target compiled (ASDF my foot, I say!), or even compiled from sources. > > Of course, I'm not saying that dependencies are an end in itself; I'm > just wondering if you or Benedikt have an alternative suggestion. > Personally, I have no other suggestion but to keep things simple. But that's just a personal point of view, and can be considered as handwaving... cheers, felix _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
