Yes, I think this is what I was looking for. I would be interested in a
discussion about the differences between (use foo) and (include "foo"), and
which one is appropriate when.
I'm guessing use for shared libraries, where include is for bringing in pieces
of program code that have been broke
Ozzi wrote:
> Is there an easy way to write something that can be either compiled
> or interpreted
I'm not sure this is exactly what you're asking, but I find include
most useful:
$ cat > bar.scm
(define (fac n)
(if (zero? n)
1
(* n (fac (- n 1)
$ cat > foo.scm
(include "bar")
(w
