[Chicken-hackers] Multiple binaries

[Tony Sidaway]

I've got a fairly large package that probably needs to be split into
two or more eggs.  I can do that, no problem, but my question doesn't
relate to that.

I dislike large source code files, so I've split it up into six
reasonably-sized source files, the content of which tends to share the
same focus.  But the files on themselves probably don't amount to
eggs.  The packaging split probably comes at a higher level, making a
five+one split between the files that are part of a run-time system
and the single file that comprises a compiler for that has that system
as a target.

Obviously I don't want to release six different eggs when it's obvious
that most end-users will want to install all of them.

Now I suppose that I *could* just smush those five files all together
again and end up with a single 800-line file, but that doesn't appeal
to me either. I have to maintain this stuff, and I find it easier to
work with small files.

Would it be possible for me to build a single egg binary from several
sources?  Does the (declare (unit x))  idiom work well with
extensions?  If so I guess I'd just compile the units into a single
binary and that would be that.  The consumer would see only the one
extension file, no matter how many source files went into producing
it.

Failing that I suppose I could hold my nose and create a container file:

(include "file1.scm")
(include "file2.scm")

and so on.

I'd appreciate contributions from people who have gone down this path
in the past, or at least considered the same conundrum that now faces
me.