Re: obsolete (?) stuff in boot-9

[Dirk Herrmann]

On 12 May 2001, Marius Vollmer wrote:

> It is hard to decide what can be removed by looking only at what Guile
> itself uses because boot-9.scm has no clear distinction between
> internal and exported definitions.  Thus, I'd say we should first move
> most of bot-9.scm into a proper module, and in that process we can
> decide what to export and what not.

OK.  However, IMO it makes sense to put as little stuff into boot-9 as
possible, i. e. only those things that are necessary to boot guile.  All
other 'nice to have' stuff should not be there.

> > > * pk as an alias for peek.  One of them should be enough, IMO.
> 
> I don't think it is problematic to have these two aliases and it is
> not clear to me which one is better so we should just keep them both.

OK, but both of these should not go into boot-9.scm, IMO.

> > > * and=>.  Not used, and the name is not obvious, so who would use it?
> 
> I find this quite useful and the name even makes sense to me.  It is
> analogous to the `=>' syntax of `cond'.  One idiom where `and=>' is
> useful is to access alists:
> 
>     (and=> (assoc 'foo alist) cdr)
> 
> It's like a one-variable `and-let*' without having to invent a name
> for that variable.
> 
>     (and-let* ((cell (assoc 'foo alist)))
>       (cdr cell))

Well, IMO the name if=> would make more sense, since there is actually
only one condition tested.  Still, should it be in boot-9?

Finally, a question:  Do you want me to deprecate the stuff, or do I
interpret your 'OK, deprecated' correcly as 'it is now deprecated in my
branch'?

Best regards,
Dirk Herrmann