Hi, zimoun <zimon.touto...@gmail.com> skribis:
>>> Maybe sorting ’%updaters’ would be enough; something like, >>> >>> (define %updaters >>> ;; The list of publically-known updaters. >>> (delay (sort (fold-module-public-variables (lambda (obj result) >> >> Whether ‘fold-module-public-variables’ is deterministic depends on >> whether ‘module-map’ is deterministic, which in turn depends on >> ‘hash-map->list’, which is not deterministic AFAICS. >> >> So what we could do is replace uses of ‘module-map’ with a variant that >> sorts variables. >> >> That said, the only case where it can influence updater order is when >> several of them are defined in the same module. [...] > we see that the updaters are file-sorted (removed here) and only they > appear unsorted when defined in the same module (underlined here). Yeah, you wort right from the start: we should sort ‘%updaters’. I’ll push something along these lines. (The other option I contemplated was to sort things in ‘fold-module-public-variables’, but that’s potentially costly for things like packages, with many variables per module, so I thought we’re rather not do it by default.) Thanks, Ludo’.
