[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Bug in eval-string?
From: |
rm |
Subject: |
Re: Bug in eval-string? |
Date: |
Mon, 12 Aug 2002 12:49:42 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.3.24i |
On Sat, Aug 10, 2002 at 04:43:36PM +0200, Marius Vollmer wrote:
> address@hidden writes:
>
> > I think i (wrongly) assumend that eval-string is "syntactic sugar"
> > for eval.
>
> There is a big difference between a macro and a function. Why did you
> think that eval-string is a macro? (The documentation of eval-string
> says that it is a procedure.)
Because sometimes, late at night, i tend to overlook the obvoius --
this is a sign of age, you'll experience it too ;-)
> > maybe the documentation should be modified:
> >
> > "Evaluation takes place in the environment returned by the\n"
> > "procedure @code{interaction-environment}.")
> >
> > to
> > "Evaluation takes place in the same environment as \n"
> > "returned by the procedure @code{interaction-environment}.")
>
> I don't see the difference between the two. The question is, for
> both, what is "the procedure interaction-environment". The name
> refers to the procedure bound to the global variable that is named
> "interaction-environment" in the guile-core module.
Hmm, my english is probably not as clear as i want it to be: from the
first version i get the impression that by modifying the procedure
'interaction-environment' i have control over the environment in which
'Eval-string' takes place. The second version tries to be a bit clearer
over the fact that 'interaction-environment' just returns the environment
(of course, since eval-string isn't a macro this is pretty much of no
importance).
> Most of this is
> implicit and applies to all of the documentation. Do we need to make
> this more explicit?
I think 'eval-string' takening an optional parameter is cleaner.
> > Wouldn't the 'eval*' interface be clearer and more orthogonal if
> > eval-string would have a second, optional parameter specifying the
> > environment/module in which evaluation should take place.
>
> Yes, this sounds good to me. I will make that change.
>
Thanks
Ralf
- Re: Bug in eval-string?, (continued)
- Re: Bug in eval-string?, Marius Vollmer, 2002/08/12
- Re: Bug in eval-string?, Marius Vollmer, 2002/08/14
- Re: Bug in eval-string?, Neil Jerram, 2002/08/19
- Re: Bug in eval-string?, Matthias Koeppe, 2002/08/20
- Re: Bug in eval-string?, Marius Vollmer, 2002/08/21
- Emacs variables (was: Bug in eval-string?), Matthias Koeppe, 2002/08/27
- Re: Emacs variables (was: Bug in eval-string?), Marius Vollmer, 2002/08/31
Re: Bug in eval-string?, Neil Jerram, 2002/08/08