[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: |
Jose A. Ortega Ruiz |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] Fix for `submodules' in (ice-9 session) (closes #30062) |
Date: |
Thu, 02 Sep 2010 01:30:08 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Hi Ludo,
On Thu, Sep 02 2010, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hello!
>
[...]
>>> 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. :-)
Oh, i see. (Then, i could/should probably test anonymous modules in
the new session.test too.)
>> 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.)
Well, something along those lines is what Geiser is actually doing right
now :)
Thanks for the clarification.
Cheers,
jao
--
Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped.
-Elbert Hubbard