I too am quite interested in a decent module system, especially after kludging a few things in the sxml-tools egg to get around the lack of one. I have a couple general questions/observations though:
- Startup time of either simple-macros or syntax-case is very long -- 1.7s as opposed to 0.1s without it, and this is on a 1.5GHz machine. So I am somewhat reluctant to use this very useful and fundamental concept except for big, non-time-critical apps. Is there room for much optimization, or is it near the limit? - Does it make sense to release official eggs using one or the other module system (assuming we pass the experimental phase)? The time and the memory penalty give me pause---same reason I don't use TinyCLOS in official stuff, seems silly to drag that much code in. - Does it make sense, given the time and space penalty, to use a module system at all for smaller projects? Obviously, we have gotten by without one, but the advantages are tempting. - I can't get define-macro to work with simple-macros (after importing chicken-macros), but I'm sure this is my fault. Don't get me wrong, it's highly interesting and I will experiment. I am just wondering if the intent is to really USE it all over the place, or if it will be relegated to occasional projects. On 8/4/05, Michele Simionato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yes, this is why I waited some time before trying it, to have things > settled down for me ;) I read the first announcement on c.l.s. a while ago > and I thought it was too good to be true. What I like the most is the > module system, I have yet to test it seriously, but at least the > description in the SRFI document makes sense and it is more or less > what I had desired for a module system for my first day in Scheme > (I remember at that time I escaped from the Mzscheme module system > which I felt overcomplicated; I also hated the fact that it forced me > to write macro definitions and helper functions in separate modules, > for reasons that never convinced me). A thing I have always looked at > with suspicion in Chicken (suspicion of being more complicated than > needed) is eval-when: OTOH, van Tonder's system works in a pretty > obvious and reasonable way (by default things are evaluated both > at compile time and import time; if you want to evaluate things > at compile time only you say so and if you want to evaluate things > at import time only you say so: the quintessence of semplicity). > Still I do not understand why things should be more complicated > than that and which are the pittfalls of van Tonder's system (if any). _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users