Marius Vollmer wrote:
Hmm. There are two things here that might want a warning: redefining
something that was a macro as a variable;
Sounds good; and vice versa? By the way, has your idea about having
"identifier -> macro" instead of "identifier -> variable -> macro" been
implemented yet?
and shadowing a core definition.
I'm not sure I like the implication of "core", as it suggests different
behaviour for privileged Guile code, vs. different layers of user code.
Isn't the rule we want "whenever a new definition shadows an existing
definition in a module, and the existing definition did not originate in
the current module"? This rule would also avoid giving unwanted
warnings when an edited module is reloaded.
Neil
_______________________________________________
Guile-user mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user
