Hi Neil, > I didn't follow why we decided that, but it feels wrong to me. (It > seems to me that Guile should be able to handle loading ((foo) v1) and > ((foo) v2) simultaneously as easily as it could handle loading > ((foo-v1)) and ((foo-v2)) simultaneously.) I guess I should look up > the previous thread, please let me know if you have a convenient > reference.
Here's a link [1]. It's possible I misinterpreted Andy's comment and Ludo's follow-up. Regards, Julian [1] - http://www.mail-archive.com/guile-devel@gnu.org/msg03541.html
