[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] Fix for `submodules' in (ice-9 session) (closes #30062)
From: |
Ludovic Courtès |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] Fix for `submodules' in (ice-9 session) (closes #30062) |
Date: |
Thu, 02 Sep 2010 00:23:40 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) |
Hello!
"Jose A. Ortega Ruiz" <address@hidden> writes:
> On Wed, Sep 01 2010, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> "Jose A. Ortega Ruiz" <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>> (I'm still curious about the meaning of the
>>> modules with gensyms as names, though.)
>>
>> psyntax expects modules to have a name so that it can refer to them in
>> expanded code. Thus, there can be no anonymous modules: modules are
>> always given a name, see ‘module-name’. This allows things like the
>> “compile in fresh module” test to work.
>
> I see. But then, aren't those modules something internal to psyntax's
> workings?
No, they’re not internal. They’re just (pseudo-)anonymous modules that
ended up in the module hierarchy, like any other module. Evaluate
(module-name (make-module)) and you’ve added another one. :-)
> And if so, shouldn't they be filtered out from the return value of
> module-submodules (or not be traversed by the apropos-fold)? As a user
> of those procedures, i find the appearance of those modules a bit
> confusing (the only use case in client code i can think of is when
> using the return value of current-module). Am i missing something?
I agree that as users we’d rather not see these modules, especially from
Geiser. But they have to be there.
So, unless I’m missing an elegant design trick to avoid this, I think
you’re bound to use heuristics to filter them out (e.g., get rid of
modules whose name contains white spaces.)
Thanks,
Ludo’.