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.
>Or is there a rational for the current, asymmetrical design? > > Practical considerations trumping theoretical ones, I would think. When one imports a library it is easiest to simply have all of its exported symbols available. When one defines an export set for a library, it is overwhemlingly the case that there will be many private implementation-specific symbols that are not intended for export. Import/export are assymetrical because they do different things. In particular, exports are part of the "work" of a library, they are a form of declaration, and so should be clear. On the other hand, providing an (export-all) for convenience might be useful, as long as the default is to be specific about what the export set is. -- Cheers, Ray Blaak blaak@xxxxxxxxxxxx