Hi, Attila Lendvai <att...@lendvai.name> skribis:
>> Another approach would be to use ‘define-record-type*’ and record all >> the default values, including those derived from other fields (just like >> the default ‘home-directory’ field of <user-account> is derived from >> ‘name’.) >> >> Does that make sense? > > > i think it does, but it would enforce a rather different code > organization. right now i have a function called APPLY-CONFIG-DEFAULTS > that is called at the beginning of each entry point to my service > code. it makes sure that the input config is valid, and returns a new > config object that has the defaults filled in. it has corss-referenced > local variables and even some local functions. [...] > Ludovic, you're not too happy about the use of extra dependencies > here, right? if so, can you please advise whether i can proceed with > giving srfi-189 a try and see what it looks like (i.e. it's not off > the table to get it accepted)? or do you have any other ideas? I think I just don’t understand yet how the needs you describe differ from those of the already available services. Do you have a preliminary version of the service where you think existing mechanisms are insufficient? Sometimes I find it clearer to discuss concrete cases. Thanks, Ludo’.