This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Guile project.
Re: A module system should resolve, not introduce, name conflicts
- To: Mikael Djurfeldt <mdj at mdj dot nada dot kth dot se>
- Subject: Re: A module system should resolve, not introduce, name conflicts
- From: Michael Livshin <mlivshin at bigfoot dot com>
- Date: 24 Feb 2000 23:06:05 +0200
- Cc: guile at sourceware dot cygnus dot com, djurfeldt at nada dot kth dot se
- Organization: who? me?
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Mikael Djurfeldt <email@example.com> writes:
> My position is that the idea of mixing forms of the module
> configuration language with the bindings it's supposed to manage is
> flawed. Using Marius' terminology it's even more clear: The name
> space manager should not contaminate the name space.
which of the two things below do you mean?
1. it is desirable to have the ability to conceal the name management
functions from code that doesn't need them.
2. name management should be a separate language from Scheme and
never shall the two meet (this looks like a citation. where is it
2 is not the only way to get 1.
Well, I wish you'd just tell me rather than trying to engage my enthusiasm,
because I haven't got one.