Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My current intention is to sit down when I have time and see if I can
> figure out what changes, if any, we would have to make to the current
> guile.init in order to be able to rely on it, rather than the code in
> slib.scm.
So here's round one.
Quite a few items in slib.scm are already in guile.init, and so we can
just drop those. There are some other bits that I wanted to present
for discussion and double-checking.
As background, at the point when any of this code executes, the
current module is (ice-9 slib).
A minor difference regards output-port-width. The version in slib.scm
returns 80 where the version in guile.init returns 79.
A more significant question regards evaluation. In slib.scm we have:
(define-public slib:eval
(lambda (x) (eval x slib-module)))
(define defmacro:eval
(lambda (x) (eval x (interaction-environment))))
where guile.init has:
;;; SLIB:EVAL is single argument eval using the top-level (user) environment.
(define slib:eval
(if (string<? (scheme-implementation-version) "1.5")
eval
(let ((ie (interaction-environment)))
(lambda (expression)
(eval expression ie)))))
(define defmacro:eval slib:eval)
The major difference here is that SLIB's slib:eval evaluates in
interaction-environment rather than the slib module. It looks like
the current defmacro:eval behaviors are the same.
--
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org; previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG starting 2002-11-03 = 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4
_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
