John Cowan scripsit: > > Typically it would only be the code that the user typed in herself that > > would need recompilation. > > You're right: in my mental model I was conflating the interaction > pseudo-module > (which no other module can depend on, since it has no name) with the "scheme" > module, the base library.
But no! That's a result of conflating modules and compilation units. There is nothing to prevent you from compiling a file containing no module declarations, which when loaded is loaded directly into the interaction environment. Remember, loading compiled code is like loading its source, which is like typing in the source. In that case, the same problem arises: if the file defines a macro which is used within it, and the REPL redefines the macro, the file must be recompiled or interpreted, both of which require the source code to be available. -- It was impossible to inveigle John Cowan <[email protected]> Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel http://www.ccil.org/~cowan Into offering the slightest apology For his Phenomenology. --W. H. Auden, from "People" (1953) _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
