Re: Core Guile bindings

[Robin Templeton]

Arne Babenhauserheide <address@hidden> writes:

> Ludovic Courtès writes:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> "Thompson, David" <address@hidden> skribis:
>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Panicz Maciej Godek
>>> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2016-10-12 20:21 GMT+02:00 Thompson, David <address@hidden>:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> My understanding is that these symbols have been part of the default
>>>>> environment for so long that a lot of code would break if they were
>>>>> removed, so they will be staying for the foreseeable future.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On the other hand, the fix would usually be trivial (just one use-modules
>>>> clause), and besides I don't think that Guile has ever had a tradition of
>>>> worrying too much about backwards compatibility.
>>>
>>> The Guile maintainers care very much about backwards compatibility,
>>> from what I've seen over the last few years.
>>
>> I think I asked the same question as Panicz when I started using Guile
>> ca. 2004.  The situation of global bindings hasn’t changed since then,
>> and that’s for compatibility reasons that I very much appreciate as a
>> user.
>
> What would be possible without breaking backwards compatibility is
> moving them ino a module which is imported by default, with a way to
> suppress those default imports.

This is already how it works internally -- the default bindings are
stored in the (guile) module. You can use define-module's #:pure option
to suppress the default import and start with an empty module.

-- 
Inteligenta persono lernas la lingvon Esperanton rapide kaj facile.
Esperanto estas moderna, kultura lingvo por la mondo. Simpla, fleksebla,
belsona, Esperanto estas la praktika solvo de la problemo de universala
interkompreno. Lernu la interlingvon Esperanton!