Hi all,
Attached are two simple patches to make the (chicken port) module
conform a bit better to core-libraries-reorganization.
Cheers,
Peter
From 8a2fdff30184a00907bcf6aaf27338fbebda2020 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Peter Bex
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 21:46:38 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Move se
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 09:55:21AM +1200, Evan Hanson wrote:
> Regarding whether to namespace the core record types, I think we
> probably _should_ do so, but it's not a priority.
Fun fact: Because we now define it as a symbol, we trigger another
GC sanity check assertion failure...
The problem i
On 2017-07-18 8:30, Peter Bex wrote:
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 09:55:21AM +1200, Evan Hanson wrote:
Regarding whether to namespace the core record types, I think we
probably _should_ do so, but it's not a priority. My attitude towards
wrapping the tags in a record type is similar; I'd be fine wit
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 7:28 PM, Evan Hanson wrote:
I really think we should hide the hash prefixing as much as possible.
> It's an implementation detail and not something users should interact
> with directly. The right way to distinguish these things is through the
> module language.
>
Per con