On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 9:23 AM, felix winkelmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 11:38 PM, Jim Ursetto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 4:39 AM, felix winkelmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> I have tried to improve the usability of the module system and exported >>> macro definitions now fully close over their lexical environment. >> >> Does this work for imported bindings as well? For example, I imported >> begin0 from miscmacros, which itself imports the scheme module and >> makes use of 'apply'. However, I can't see 'apply' without manually >> importing scheme. > > Apparently, the full closure works only for locally defined entities. > I think this case could be called "support for indirect re-exports".
It was something completely different (special handling of primitives), and I think I have it fixed now. I'm waiting for the next bug. But basically, this thing is getting better and better. I really recommend everybody to give it a try. Programming with modules catches many unbound-variable errors and missing library uses, allows to use shorter names and one can finally code extensively with macros, without having to worry about compile-time/ run-time issues (well, with a batch-compiler there will always be situations where one has to be aware of the separation, but this is vastly better than fiddling with `syntax' and `require-at-runtime' setup-options). cheers, felix _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
