[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: namespaces, goops, etc.
From: |
thi |
Subject: |
Re: namespaces, goops, etc. |
Date: |
Fri, 3 Nov 2000 08:58:16 -0800 |
From: "Lars J. Aas" <address@hidden>
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 17:18:53 +0100
I've noticed I can use the module system's "define-public" inside
functions and get internal definitions exported to the toplevel
namespace.
I'm curious on whether this is just a side-effect of the
implementation of the module system, or if it is supposed to work
like this and people can take advantage of it?
well, here's the documentation for `define-public':
@deffn syntax define-public @dots{}
Makes a procedure or variable available to programs that use the current
module.
@end deffn
so you could argue that the observed behavior is how it is supposed to
work. however, this strikes me as really ugly; IMHO, `define-public' is
a misfeature and should be deprecated.
consider the case where two internal vars have the same name and both
are bound using `define-public' instead of `define'. source ordering
then comes into play and the latter usage stomps on the former. yuk.
sick and wrong.
thi
- namespaces, goops, etc., Lars J. Aas, 2000/11/03
- Re: namespaces, goops, etc.,
thi <=
- Re: namespaces, goops, etc., Michael Livshin, 2000/11/03
- Re: namespaces, goops, etc., Lars J. Aas, 2000/11/03
- Re: namespaces, goops, etc., Michael Livshin, 2000/11/03
- Re: namespaces, goops, etc., Lars J. Aas, 2000/11/03
- Re: namespaces, goops, etc., Michael Livshin, 2000/11/03
- Re: namespaces, goops, etc., Lars J. Aas, 2000/11/03
- Re: namespaces, goops, etc., Lars J. Aas, 2000/11/03
- Re: namespaces, goops, etc., Mikael Djurfeldt, 2000/11/06
- Re: namespaces, goops, etc., Michael Livshin, 2000/11/07
- Re: namespaces, goops, etc., Mikael Djurfeldt, 2000/11/08