Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 16:40 +0100 schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld: > Am Sonntag, den 08.03.2020, 16:28 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup: > > So I am reasonably confident that with some reasonably designed chunks > > of code, we'd end up with comparatively small headaches in upkeep. My > > own gut feeling is that we'd not burn (or obstruct) any major bridges > > supporting GUILE_CONFIG: if it is explicitly given, we don't really need > > to check for versions or any other viability considerations: we can just > > set the variables and be done.
Oh, turns out I need to strongly disagree with the last sentence: It's probably not of concern right now, but if we ever were to require Guile 2.x (I hope we're going to, and not only with 2.24) we should throw a hard error if a user presents us a guile-config from 1.8. Otherwise there will be linker errors, which are much harder to diagnose. Let me know if I'm missing something. Jonas
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
