|
From: | Pierre Neidhardt |
Subject: | [bug#37817] [PATCH 1/7] gnu: Add cl-heap., [bug#37817] [PATCH 2/7] gnu: Add curry-compose-reader-macros., [bug#37817] [PATCH 3/7] gnu: Add yason., [bug#37817] [PATCH 4/7] gnu: sbcl-iterate: Add missing native input., [bug#37817] [PATCH 5/7] gnu: Add ecl-iterate., [bug#37817] [PATCH 6/7] gnu: Add stefil., [bug#37817] [PATCH 7/7] gnu: Add graph. |
Date: | Mon, 21 Oct 2019 12:16:30 +0200 |
Guillaume Le Vaillant <address@hidden> writes: > Also, I saw that there is a 'graph.scm' file with definitions of graph > related packages. Should I put 'sbcl-graph', 'sbcl-graph-dot' and > 'sbcl-graph-json' in it, or should I keep them in 'lisp.scm'? In my understanding, file separation works as follows: 1. Make sure the file compilation graph is as simple as possible. 2. If 1. does not apply (e.g. same complexity is both cases), place the package where it's most relevant. 3. If neither 1 nor 2 apply, that is, if a package is relevant in both files, well, do what suits you best :) Here my intuition would be to leave them in lisp.scm. Cheers! -- Pierre Neidhardt https://ambrevar.xyz/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |