diogo...@gmail.com (Diogo F. S. Ramos) writes: > Max Mikhanosha <m...@openchat.com> writes: > >>> Unfortunately, by doing all this, I couldn't directly access a function >>> called `bar', which is not exported by stumpwm, so I had to use `::'. It >>> looks like a good symbol to export to me. >> >> stumpwm export list is IMHO stale, and its impossible to extend it >> well without using internal symbols, so I see absolutely no problem with >> that. > > Hum, that's unfortunate. > > I think that a nice set of exported symbols would be nice. Of course, > it's much easier said than done.
Maybe we could use the two packages #:stumpwm and #:stuwmpm-user by exporting a small set of symbols in #:stumpwm-user required to use and configure it and a larger set in #:stumpwm to develop modules with it. Currently, the #:stuwmpwm-user package doesn't contain any symbols and is only used by two modules. Ofc to minimize the amount of change required we could simply add another package like #:stumpwm-dev. _______________________________________________ Stumpwm-devel mailing list Stumpwm-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
