This is the mail archive of the guile@cygnus.com mailing list for the guile project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [ANN]: boot-9 slimming r2


Greg Harvey wrote:
> 
> Maciej Stachowiak <mstachow@viewlogic.com> writes:
> 
> > Greg Harvey wrote:
> > >
> > > Greg Harvey <Greg.Harvey@thezone.net> writes:
> > > >
> > > > Note: ice-9 needs to be replaced with something more sensible
> > > > (guile-core is my preference, tho guile-system would also be good).
> > > > This is the last revision that will be compatable with the current
> > > > naming.
> > >
> >
> > I think we previously hashed out that (guile ...) is a good namespace
> > for
> > modules that are part of Guile.
> 
> Just (guile foo), or something more (guile core foo) ? My first
> thought was that using guile might hose things if you were to have
> /.../share in your load path... I'll give that a try today.
> 

Just (guile foo).

Having /..../share in your guile load path shouldn't hurt unless you put
files with the same names as the guile-core modules directly in 
/..../share/guile/.


> My thinking is that these aren't operations that are used (or needed)
> all that often (and certainly not as often as the operations on real
> numbers), so, while it may not be the nicest way of going about it, it
> isn't a bad tradeoff to put the cost of having the functions on the
> people who actually use them, while still providing lightweight
> versions for average use.

I dunno - would you think the same thing if the default Guile `+' and
`*'
didn't work on complex numbers, even though the guile core supported
them?
Or if the default `length' would hang on a circular list (the standard
allows
this) but you could load a module that would make it throw an error
instead?

I think the right thing to do ultimately is to fix the C code to work
right in the 
first place, I might take a look at that myself once I make a little
more 
progress on my excessively long free software hacking todo list. C9X
defines most
of the relevant functions for complex numbers anyway so it should be
essentially 
zero cost to do it that way on reasonably up-to-date systems.

 - Maciej