Andy Wingo scripsit: > Include is valuable, no doubt about it. However `load' with relative > paths does not make any portable kind of sense. If you want to load > code at runtime portably, build an absolute path.
Absolute paths are less portable than relative ones -- why, Windows and Posix don't even agree on what an absolute path looks like, not to mention that different systems are laid out differently. Relative paths with slashes (which the Windows kernel is fine with, though various parts of the UI insist on backslashes) are the nearest thing to portability we have. -- You annoy me, Rattray! You disgust me! John Cowan You irritate me unspeakably! Thank Heaven, [email protected] I am a man of equable temper, or I should http://www.ccil.org/~cowan scarcely be able to contain myself before your mocking visage. --Stalky imitating Macrea _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
