This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 83 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 83 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
Tony Garnock-Jones wrote:
"Source code in files. How quaint. How 70's." (Kent Beck)
If prefer, replace "file" with "something that has a URI".
Scheme code doesn't have to live anywhere in particular - it can be sourced from anywhere, from files, from stdin, from an email message, from a database - the only constraint on scheme code is that it is an S-expression.
Right, but we're talking about "named libraries". Once something has a name, you can give it a URI. If you have multiple named resources A, B, and C nested within a resource X, then we have standard way of naming them: X/A, X/B, and X/C. This all works best if A, B, and C are separate "units of characters", rather than being concatenated together.
List syntax is already suitable for sequencing S-expressions within an S-expression. Files provide a second-class means of sequencing S-expressions. Recovering a complete list of S-expressions from a file requires some small-but-nonzero amount of work.
Beside the point: a collection of libraries is not a "sequence": It is a *mapping*, from names to libraries.
A file is not always the best granularity for a library
True, but we're trying to standardize a useful portable basic feature.
- sometimes many small libraries are best expressed in a single file,
I think this is fairly rare, and not a very important use case. If they're small, why should they be separate libraries? > and sometimes a
single library is best expressed in multiple files.
Right, though this not directly handled by the proposal. It can be handled by using a compound library importing and re-exporting smaller libraries.
The scoping of the |library| form can be unclear if forms /following/ the declaration are to be considered part of the library: (library "mylib" "scheme://r6rs") (define library (compose write list)) (library "otherlib" "scheme://r6rs") (define number 17)
The proposal doesn't support nested library forms, so I don't see why this is relevant. -- --Per Bothner per@xxxxxxxxxxx http://per.bothner.com/