[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] Per-module reader, take #2
From: |
Neil Jerram |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] Per-module reader, take #2 |
Date: |
Wed, 19 Oct 2005 23:23:58 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) |
address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Neil Jerram <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Thanks for taking my considerations into account and producing this
>> update. My gut feel is that I do like this new patch better, but I'd
>> like to think about it more. I also need to go back and finish my
>> draft reply to your previous email - I'll try to do that in the next
>> day or so.
>
> Ok.
>
>> Also, do you have docs for guile-reader up somewhere?
>
> Yes. The doc for 0.1 is there:
>
> http://www.laas.fr/~lcourtes/software/guile/guile-reader.html
Thanks, very interesting. I have some queries about your API, but
I'll leave those for another time.
I've finally reached a clear view on what I think about your reader
patch. I completely agree with your arguments as regards what is
problematic about the current system of read-hash-extend and read
options, and I think it's great that you are using guile-reader to try
to solve that. (And the GNU Lightning aspect, which I don't
understand yet, sounds very cool.)
I don't think it should be connected with modules, though. In my
view:
- modules should be about identifier access and visibility (including
issues such as possible separate compilation in future), and nothing
else (and yes, this does imply that #:use-syntax was a mistake)
- the appropriate unit of scope for your custom readers should be the
file, not the module; for two reasons in particular:
- the file makes sense as a unit within which the coder would want
custom reading rules
- associating a reader with a file instead of with a module means
that your whole enhancement will work for code that is not
organized into a module, as well as for that which is!
What do you think? If you agree, I think the implication is that two
APIs (which can probably be straightforward procedures) would be
useful:
1. A way to say "change the reader to XXX for the rest of this file".
2. A way to say "load FILE using reader XXX".
Regards,
Neil
- Re: [PATCH] Per-module reader, Ludovic Courtès, 2005/10/11
- Re: [PATCH] Per-module reader, Neil Jerram, 2005/10/11
- Re: [PATCH] Per-module reader, Ludovic Courtès, 2005/10/12
- Re: [PATCH] Per-module reader, take #2, Ludovic Courtès, 2005/10/17
- Re: [PATCH] Per-module reader, take #2, Neil Jerram, 2005/10/17
- Re: [PATCH] Per-module reader, take #2, Ludovic Courtès, 2005/10/18
- Re: [PATCH] Per-module reader, take #2,
Neil Jerram <=
- Re: [PATCH] Per-module reader, take #2, Kevin Ryde, 2005/10/19
- Re: [PATCH] Per-module reader, take #2, Ludovic Courtès, 2005/10/20
- Re: [PATCH] Per-module reader, take #2, Kevin Ryde, 2005/10/20
- Re: [PATCH] Per-module reader, take #2, Neil Jerram, 2005/10/20
- Re: [PATCH] Per-module reader, take #2, Ludovic Courtès, 2005/10/20
- Re: [PATCH] Per-module reader, take #2, Tomas Zerolo, 2005/10/20
- Re: [PATCH] Per-module reader, take #2, Ludovic Courtès, 2005/10/20
- Re: [PATCH] Per-module reader, take #2, Neil Jerram, 2005/10/20
- Re: [PATCH] Per-module reader, take #2, Ludovic Courtès, 2005/10/21
- Re: [PATCH] Per-module reader, take #2, Ludovic Courtès, 2005/10/24