Re: [Chicken-users] Chickenlib

[felix]

address@hidden wrote:
> I know that it's currently a one-man project - but would people mind
> if I put chickenlib into CVS on Savannah, as a sister module to
> chicken?
>
> Perhaps I should choose a less generic name (but what?), so when a
> *real* community-style collection of Chicken code gets started, it can
> take the obvious name. Or do people think that what I've called
> chickenlib is a good-enough base to build from?
>
> Perhaps instead there should be several modules, chicken-net,
> chicken-lalr, chicken-db, chicken-gtk2, chicken-readline, chicken-gl,
> chicken-ubf etc. etc.?
>

Sounds like a very reasonable idea. I really like the stuff, but I would
like to keep the Chicken-core system portable across different
platforms, so this can't go into the base-system. I already feel bad
about not incorporating the code written by several people into the
chicken-distribution, but (for the said reasons), I can't. With
this chickenlib we could put everything together (perhaps MPlib, SCOP,
etc.?) at one place.

Actually, the more I think about it, the more I like this approach:
A complete UNIX-based extension library package simplifies the build- 
and installation chores for the user (he/she just has to download the
whole thing - most of it is source-code anyway, so it will be compact).
No endless searching for missing components.

This is cool. And I like the name: "chickenlib" ... corresponds somehow
to "slib", with the difference that the former provides somewhat more
"practical" stuff. I would keep the stuff together, in one package.
configuration-parameters or a config-script could select the
components one wants to install, perhaps with automatic dependency
checking.


cheers,
felix