On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Alan Watson <[email protected]> wrote: > Draft 6 states that the an include library declaration expands to the > contents of the named files wrapped in a begin. However, this restricts > included files to containing only commands and definitions and not further > library declarations. One use of include is to separate the interface (i.e., > the export declaration) and the implementation. However, this restriction on > import makes this difficult, since the implementation will typically use > imports and possibly cond-expands, but these cannot appear in the included > file. > > I understand the WG has considered some aspects of libraries since draft 6. > Have they fixed this?
We have not, as no one has considered it "broken". It is very important to have a clean separation between library declarations and Scheme code, so if we did consider such an extension it would have to be separate, e.g. (include-library-declarations "foo.sld"). If exporting the same interface is the only use-case, we could also consider an (export-interface (foo)) to export the same identifiers as library (foo). I was considering such advanced library uses as a topic for WG2 or later SRFIs. -- Alex _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
