Hi, zimoun <zimon.touto...@gmail.com> skribis:
>> Perhaps this suggests we should document it, maybe in the “Coding Style” >> section? WDYT? I was really thinking about this pattern of not always exposing raw record constructors or record type descriptors. > I have read the Channel section again. Maybe there in the big Red Warning > place. > Something saying that the API exposes what it necessary to extend > respecting user freedom (better worded); I think this particular bit is implied by the current text, no? > with a footnote mentioning that non exported functions can be reached > with @@ with a reference to the Guile manual. Using private bindings is always at the user’s own risks, I’ll never suggest using @@ to “break the rules”. :-) Ludo’.
