Re: What replaces scm_register_module_xxx (Doc update?)

[Marius Vollmer]

Dirk Herrmann <address@hidden> writes:

> > There still is.  In this case, and assuming that both modules have
> > been loaded, there is a variable named `c' in (a b) whose value is the
> > module (a b c).
> 
> Is this just historical cruft?

I would say so.

-- 
GPG: D5D4E405 - 2F9B BCCC 8527 692A 04E3  331E FAF8 226A D5D4 E405