hi, On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 04:52:17PM +0200, felix winkelmann wrote:
> It would be helpful if the chicken users and hackers take a moment > to consider whether this is acceptable and right, or whether we > should keep the current system, which is less scalable in terms of > modularity, but nevertheless quite stable. to me it sounds like the way to go; i always wanted to have a module system in the core that can be used by eggs without worrying about dependencies or incompatibilities. the same is true for a hygienic macro system i guess ... but i haven't used hygienic macros a lot before. my question is: will it still be possible to write a (er-) macro that creates new identifiers like define-record does? from previous postings i got differing impressions. i know it's not considered good style to do that but it saved me a lot of typing in the directfb egg and those macros are only used internally and not made available to user code. tnx&bye, hans. _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
