On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 02:15:58PM +0200, felix winkelmann wrote: > On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Peter Bex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> Even though "getenv" is more widespread, following the SRFI might be > >> the right way. > > > > Agreed. Perhaps now is a good time to start thinking about some kind of > > system for ensuring backwards compat, to prevent cruft from accumulating? > > What I usually do is deprecating the old API and making a note somewhere > to remove the deprecated piece of functionality one or two major releases > later. Would you suggest a particular sort of process?
Hmm, that sounds just fine, I suppose. No need to formalize that. This should probably also have happened with the recently added 'Unit files', I think. Cheers, Peter -- http://sjamaan.ath.cx -- "The process of preparing programs for a digital computer is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic experience much like composing poetry or music." -- Donald Knuth
pgpMHIygo0RcW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
