[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Scheme-reports] organizational comment regarding modules
- To: Andy Wingo <wingo@x>
- Subject: Re: [Scheme-reports] organizational comment regarding modules
- From: John Cowan <cowan@x>
- Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 00:46:39 -0400
- Cc: scheme-reports <scheme-reports@x>
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <email@example.com> <20110519173927.GE3745@mercury.ccil.org> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Andy Wingo scripsit:
> (2) at least beyond wg1 you are definitely going to be concerned about
> where your binding for `open-database' is coming from.
Oh yes, beyond WG2 I agree that module organization (or package organization,
where a package is a notional thing containing one or more modules) is the
only way to go. But for WG1 it's mostly just bureaucratic.
John Cowan cowan@x http://ccil.org/~cowan
In the sciences, we are now uniquely privileged to sit side by side
with the giants on whose shoulders we stand.
Scheme-reports mailing list