felix winkelmann scripsit:
> Even though "getenv" is more widespread, following the SRFI might be
> the right way.
Let's have both, it's cheap enough: just one more name for the same
function. And being able to capture the whole environment as an a-list
is a big win in certain circumstances.
--
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 02:15:58PM +0200, felix winkelmann wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Peter Bex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Even though "getenv" is more widespread, following the SRFI might be
> >> the right way.
> >
> > Agreed. Perhaps now is a good time to start thinking
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Peter Bex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Even though "getenv" is more widespread, following the SRFI might be
>> the right way.
>
> Agreed. Perhaps now is a good time to start thinking about some kind of
> system for ensuring backwards compat, to prevent cruft f
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 10:42:22AM +0200, felix winkelmann wrote:
> Hi!
>
>
> What do people think of
>
> http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-98/
>
> Even though "getenv" is more widespread, following the SRFI might be
> the right way.
Agreed. Perhaps now is a good time to start thinking about some
Hi!
What do people think of
http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-98/
Even though "getenv" is more widespread, following the SRFI might be
the right way.
cheers,
felix
___
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-users@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman
Hi, folks!
I'd like to merge the hygienic branch into trunk (or more specifically,
convert trunk into a branch and replace it with hygienic) at some stage.
Should be figure out some sort of time-schedule for this? If yes, please
give me advice.
cheers,
felix
_
