Re: Fmt Module

[Andreas Rottmann]

address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

> Hello,
>
> Andreas Rottmann <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
>> However, even if I think based on your criteria nothing speaks against
>> including fmt in Guile, there is still the argument of code duplication:
>> if some external library (e.g., conjure) makes use of wak-fmt and
>> another chooses the version included in Guile, a third program/library
>> can't make use of both of these without ending up with two copies of the
>> `fmt' code loaded, incurring a load-time and memory usage overhead.
>> Obviously, there's also duplicated work involved in maintaining the
>> different adaptions of the `fmt' code.  
>
> I agree.
>
> I think there’s a tension between the interest of Guile, which is to
> provide a convenient way to access useful features, and the interests of
> implementation-neutral “platforms” like Wak.  For instance I find it
> important to have SXML, LALR, etc. usable out-of-the-box; it lowers the
> barrier to entry.
>
I certainly understand that.  Hopefully the CPAN effort for Guile will
bear some fruits and make it very easy to get additional libraries
installed.

> Besides it’s still unclear (to me) what the future of Wak and similar
> projects is.  I hope that it will take off, but I haven’t forgotten
> Snow, ScmPkg, etc. either.
>
Well, there's a (IMHO) important difference in that Wak packages are
based on R6RS, which specifies a module system.  This way, you don't
really need a package manager to install the code from Wak -- you can
reasonably install by copying or symlinking files.

>> I think the ideal solution
>
> I think there’s no ideal solution, not yet.  :-)
>
Indeed, that's why I used the subjunctive and even said that the
(hypothetical) ideal solution is not realistic yet :-p.

Regards, Rotty
-- 
Andreas Rottmann -- <http://rotty.yi.org/>