Works like a charm! Thanks.
On 10/15/07, Stephen Compall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Julian Graham wrote: > > (SRFI-18 make-condition-variable takes an optional argument that you > > can use to "name" the condition var). To work around this, I was > > going to create backup bindings of the original primitives and then > > refer to them in my scheme reimplementations, a la: > > > > (define guile:make-condition-variable make-condition-variable) > > (define (make-condition-variable . foo) > > (let ((m (guile:make-condition-variable))) (do-something))) > > > > ...and even if the user noticed the slightly different behavior, that > > would be okay, because she'd specifically requested it by loading > > (srfi srfi-18). > > I can always get those if I want them with (@ (guile) > make-condition-variable). > > Also, unless there's a type conflict, I think other existing modules > simply assume you can deal with more optional arguments than you expect. > For example, SRFI-1 adds a third optional argument to assoc, the `=' > argument. You can use `#:replace' in define-module to suppress the warning. _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
