On Tue 21 Jun 2016 14:38, Zefram <zef...@fysh.org> writes: > Andy Wingo wrote: >>Thoughts? > > How was this managed in Guile 1.8?
The printers and the backtrace handling was quite different, but it used "print states". > It seems that you need the truncated-print mechanism to be always > available internally, but this doesn't require that it be always visible > to the user. You can still require the full libraries to be loaded for > the user to get access. > > Lazy loading sounds like a bad idea. Error handling is a bad place to > attempt something that complex and failure-prone. That's what we do for backtrace printing in 2.2, for what it's worth. It's a tradeoff between memory size, good errors, maintainability, startup time, safety, duplication... the global optimimum corresponds to no per-axis optimimum :/ Andy