Hi Per,
Per Bothner wrote:
You really have to treat ls as a macro, which is resolved at
compile-time. Otherwise, it becomes near-impossible to
compile name-lookup efficiently. And if you can't compile
it, it's a toy.
Bash script is not compiled, but it is quite useful. Not a toy at all.
> ... and it is bound to some value that we can see ...
This is the hard part: what does "that we can see" mean?
Perhaps I'm missing something, because this does not seem at all
difficult. Suppose I am running some guile code. I type something like:
guile>(+ 2 5)
Eval looks up the + symbol and sees that it is bound to a primitive
function. So, what "that we can see" means is anything which eval is
already and normally able to resolve to some value. Perhaps the best
way to implement this would be as an error handler for the Unbound
variable error.
guile>(ls)
Backtrace:
In current input:
2: 0* (ls)
<unnamed port>:2:1: In expression (ls):
<unnamed port>:2:1: Unbound variable: ls
ABORT: (unbound-variable)
Instead of dying when a variable in the function spot is not bound, we
would do a quick $PATH lookup, and if we found something then, we'd
execute it. Otherwise, we'd just go ahead with the Unbound variable
error as normal.
Regards,
Jon
_______________________________________________
Guile-user mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user
