Re: guile-occam and question

[Marius Vollmer]

"Arjan J. Molenaar" <address@hidden> writes:

> 1. I can make it a module by adding something like (define-module
> ...) at the beginning of the file. But where should I put the file
> if I want it to be accessed as a module from any other scheme
> program?

You should install your file in a location where Guile can
automatically find it.  Whenever a module is requested that is not
already present in the system, Guile looks in its load path and tries
to load a file that will define the module.

The current load path is in the variable %load-path.

When your module is named `(foo bar)', say, then you should make a
directory named "foo" in some directory that is on the load path and
put a file named "bar.scm" in it.  The file "bar.scm" would contain a
`(define-module (foo bar))'.

> 2. Where should I add docstrings for my scheme functions/macros and
> how can I generate nice docs from them?

The docstring is the first form of the body of a function, like so:

    guile> (define (foo) "This is foo." 12)
    guile> (help ,foo)
    This is foo.

> 3. How can I make SMOB's from scheme code? I'd like to see a channel
> as a special type. Otherwise: how can I check if something is indeed
> a channel?

You don't use SMOBs from Scheme code.  For new data types, using GOOPS
is the best options.  It is on the module `guile-oops'.

> 4. Is this the way scheme code is to be written ;-)?

Hmm, no. ;) 

I'd say you are using way too much macros.  Most of your macros
can just be functions.  Functions are generally preferable to macros
when you can use them.

Among your exported definitions, only `define-channel', `seq', `par',
and `alt' should be macros, the rest can be functions.  They way you
define `seq' is not really clean, you should rather use

    (defmacro-public seq forms
      `(begin ,@forms))

This is because macros are not really first-class objects that can be
passed around.  They happen to be it right now, but you shouldn't use
that fact.

While I don't have the time to rewrite your code, I think it would be
an excellent exercise to do so. :-)  Any takers?