Re: What's the deal with the module system?

[David Kastrup]

Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> writes:

> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 1:21 PM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>>>  lilypond a.ly b.ly
>>>
>>> we want to reuse the built-in definitions, without changes effected
>>> in a.ly leaking into the processing of b.ly
>>
>> Wouldn't just putting the built-in definition at public scope
>> accomplish that?
>
> I don't know.  Why don't you try it, and send us a patch if it passes
> the regression tests?

That would not be my first thought when meddling with code I know
nothing about, and where I assume that somebody had created it because
of some inherent necessity.  And not every dead end needs to be entered
repeatedly.  It is a waste of time.

But I think that guile's module system changed in the last few years, so
it is actually possible that some necessities went away since the code
was written.

I'll probably take a look.

-- 
David Kastrup