[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-hackers] Made a start with CHICKEN 5 proposal

From: Andy Bennett
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] Made a start with CHICKEN 5 proposal
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 11:11:31 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/24.6.0


> * Please use long, explicit library names, it's easier to remember
>   ("there are many ways to abbreviate something, but only one way not
>   to" - I forgot who said this, John will tell me, I'm sure.) And I
>   would also suggest to avoid using "srfi-XXX" as a module name, and
>   to use something meaningful (yes, I know that in the past I was
>   largely responsible for that mistake in numerous situations.) That
>   would also allow adding our own extensions.

This is a good point and comes up time and again (in IRC). The most
functionally important thing seems to be the way module names interact
with portable code. Isn't srfi-XXX the only portable way to do it? Isn't
"long names" the only friendly way to do it?



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]