Re: Proposal: allow "guile foo.scm"

[Paul Jarc]

"Jose A. Ortega Ruiz" <address@hidden> wrote:
> IMHO, the best way would be to support SRFI-22 (Running Scheme scripts
> in Unix, http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-22/srfi-22.html),

This has also come up before.  IIRC, the consensus (or at least one of
the suggestions) was that if this were to be supported at all, it
should be in a separate binary, not guile itself (for backwards
compatibility, and because guile's #!...!# mechanism is more
flexible).

> [1]  Actually, i'm oversimplifying here: the SRFI suggests also
> concrete names for the interpreter (instead of just 'guile'),
> according to its compliance to RnRS.

Another reason to make it a separate binary, then.


paul