MSavoritias <em...@msavoritias.me> writes: > Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide kirjoitti 20.7.2024 klo 17.52: >> Lassi Kortela <la...@lassi.io> writes: >>>> It would be easy to state in more places "the standard library of guile >>>> is called ice-9 (see [history])". >>> With no disrespect intended -- I understand it's a joke that was funny >>> at one time -- "the standard library of Guile is called ice-9" sounds >>> like "the unit of mass is called footballs". If so, why would a smart >>> newbie learn more? >> (I know that this is a paradoxical question; I’m pointing to it, because >> *we actually do not know*, so maybe we should refrain from discussing >> the hypothetical smart newbie when all of us who are here would by >> definition not match that description) > Just a note here, I am that newbie :)
By definition of the smart newbie given in the thread, you can’t be that, because you did keep learning :-) (but that’s just a tongue in cheek answer …) > We should make it easier to learn guile over time. I agree. I just disagree that this is the best way for that. > I strongly disagree forcing newbies to go through the same things we > did just to make a point. That’s not the goal. The goal is to avoid breaking existing tools, tutorials, and skills. Is it worse to learn about ice-9, srfi, web, and rnrs, or to learn from one tutorial about ice-9 and web, and from the other about guile and (guile web)? I’ve written and published a book about Guile.¹ The printed copies and downloaded PDFs will for ever and ever include ice-9, because I cannot change it. I could not, if I wanted. So if we change from ice-9 to guile, that should have higher benefit than the cost of inconsistency between old and new documentation. Changing best practices causes soft trauma² to those who learned the old ones. And we inherently have different main namespaces: rnrs and srfi are not going away. They are deeply engrained in our infrastructure. Additionally we’d have to ask whether these should actually be in (guile ...). (ice-9 match) is actually from chibi-scheme, just with three shims added so the upstream code runs unmodified. Calling that (guile ...) would falsely imply that it is implementation specific. The deeper I look into it, the less I think that a (guile ...) module would be a good idea. Instead I now think that we need to check our documentation why people don’t find the different namespaces early and effortlessly enough that they are obvious. ¹ https://www.draketo.de/py2guile ² https://drewdevault.com/2019/11/26/Avoid-traumatic-changes.html — another one who got hit by Python 3 Best wishes, Arne -- Unpolitisch sein heißt politisch sein, ohne es zu merken. draketo.de
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
