"Abdulaziz Ghuloum" wrote: >> OS-specific policy? > > We have one OS so far, so, one policy.
I cannot recall why, but it was my understanding that you are using an Apple OS... In everything below and in my previous post, what I meant is that, whatever method Ikarus adopts to do its thing, I would like the flexibility to configure it to reach the goals I mentioned; I am not saying that Ikarus has to come with my wishes built in. Since this is a survey, I am saying what is the maximum flexibility I would like to have. > Why would you want multiple cache directories? To have both system libraries and user libraries; installable and uninstallable independently. In a no-cache scenario, I like the way Emacs deals with precompiled and source files; but with a compiler I also want to put compiled stuff in a different directory. In a cache scenario, I like the way caches of preformatted Unix manual pages are built. IMO the only thing Ikarus itself has to do to allow both of these, is to have a search path for SLS and FASL and a way to specify where to put the next precompiled library. > Ikarus doesn't put anything in $prefix/share/scheme or > $prefix/lib/scheme and there is no standard/srfi/os policy > stating where scheme library files should go in the OS. Exactly. So Ikarus only needs to provide a way to choose; then everybody will propose and experiment with its policy and in the end the best will win. >> - Optionally, put FASL under one of the following: >> >> $prefix/lib/ikarus/<spec-pathname> > > What's <spec-pathname>? It was mentioned by leppie and you that an architecture-specific cache or debug/non-debug cache differentiation may come in handy in some future; so: <spec-pathname> = <cache-root>/the/path/name it is also useful to test/debug code with different versions of the compiler and this leads (IMHO) to version-specific caches. -- Marco Maggi
