Re: [PATCH] add language/wisp to Guile?

[Maxime Devos]

On 23-02-2023 12:36, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Sorry for the late reply.
>
> FWIW, I think it might be best to keep Wisp as a separate package: that
> allows it to evolve independently of Guile (and possibly more quickly
> :-)), and it might simplify maintenance in some way.

To my understanding, Wisp is pretty much finished -- it is standardised 
as surfie 119: <https://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-119/>, which is in final 
status.  As such, there is no room for evolving (beside bugfixes, perhaps).

The maintenance aspect (and also the evolving) is addressed in the cover 
letter:

> - And it provides access to the full capabilities of Guile with minimal
>   maintenance effort, because it is just the thinnest possible layer
>   around Scheme. The last required change was in 2020 while I used it
>   continuously.

There also were several other points in the cover letter for keeping 
Wisp as a _non-separate_ package.

Why should Wisp be a separate package when other SRFIs are made part of 
Guile?  Your point about maintenance and evolving applies equally to 
other SRFIs.

> Adding #lang support in Guile would be nice.  As discussed on IRC, it
> can be experimented with in a WIP branch.

Have you seen my messages on how the "#lang" construct is problematic 
for some languages, and how alternatives like "[comment delimiter] -*- 
stuff: scheme/ecmascript/... -*- [comment delimiter]" appear to be 
equally simple (*) and not have any downsides (**).

(*) The port encoding detection supports "-*- coding: whatever -*-", 
presumably that functionality could be reused.

(**) For compatibility with Racket, it's not like we couldn't implement 
both "#lang" and "-*- stuff: language -*-".

Greetingss,
Maxime.

OpenPGP_0x49E3EE22191725EE.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature