Re: [Chicken-hackers] [Chicken-users] Spiffy subprocess cleanup

[Peter Bex]

On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 02:39:23AM -0700, Evan Hanson wrote:
> I did run into an unrelated issue while poking around with the patch,
> after defining a new procedure `process-wait` for testing -- should
> `process` use a "##sys" variant of `process-wait` in its definition?

Yeah, probably.  Good catch, I've applied and pushed your patch since
it's a trivial and obvious fix.

> I don't quite grok what the guarantees are w.r.t. user shadowing &
> internal procedures in the units, but I think there are a few cases in
> posix where an internal variant could (should?) be used.

Yeah, CHICKEN core does not use "real" modules, and in many cases either
a ##core/##sys prefix is used for internal procedures, or the following
"pattern" occurs:

(define foo
  (let ((internal internal))
    (lambda (arg1 arg2)
      (internal arg1))))

This should be fixed at some point, but it kind of requires a complete
overhaul of core..  I'm not even sure it's possible at all, maybe Felix
can enlighten us?

Cheers,
Peter
-- 
http://www.more-magic.net