Re: Defining a library in one file

On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 9:31 PM, Carl Gay <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Dustin Voss <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Feb 17, 2013, at 7:21 AM, Hannes Mehnert <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Carl,
>> >
>> > I appreciate that step forward.
>> >
>> > I'd consider naming the keywords "Use-Libraries" and "Use-Modules"
>> > (these are case-independent according to DRM anyways), and then limit
>> > the header to one occurrence of these keywords - similar to what
>> > Gwydion Dylan does/did for compatibility.
>> >
>> > I would require each "Use-*" keyword to span over a single line, which
>> > is generally true for the file headers of Dylan files (see
>> > http://opendylan.org/books/drm/Dylan_Interchange_Format).
>>
>> You mean like this?
>>
>> Use-Libraries:
>>     common-dylan, exclude: { simple-io };
>>     io
>> Use-Modules:
>>     common-dylan, rename: { debug-message -> log },
>>           export: log;
>>     format-out;
>>
>
> This is what I guessed also.  I think this way works really well for (what
> I hope is) the common case of importing entire modules, taking all defaults:
>
> Use-Libraries: system, logging, io
> Use-Modules: operating-system, logging, format-out
>

I misspoke.  It would actually use semicolons there instead of commas.
 e.g.,

Use-Libraries: system; logging; io
Use-Modules: operating-system; logging; format-out

This probably seems like a small thing, but I'm willing to bet it will be a
common mistake, especially for new users, since there's no apparent reason
for it until you write a more complex Use-Modules header with commas in it.


>
> The down side is the slightly more awkward-looking (IMO) long format in
> your example, with semicolons.
>
>
>>
>> It might be simpler to just map each header to a single definer clause
>> rather than a semicolon-separated list of clauses, and keep it as
>> “Use-Library” and “Use-Module”.
>>
>
> As I mentioned, I don't have a strong preference.  They both seem to work.
>  If anyone else wants to weigh in, please do.
>
>
>>
>> I might also suggest adding “Module-Creates” as follows (keeping the
>> noun-verb pattern):
>>
>> Module-Exports:
>>     log-to-file
>> Module-Creates:
>>     log-formatter, *log-file-name*
>>
>
> I confess to not being sure whether this makes any sense in a singe-module
> library.  I've only ever seen it in libraries that define several modules.
>
>
>>
>> Or perhaps call them “Export-Module-Names” and “Create-Module-Names” to
>> keep the verb-noun pattern of “Use-Library” and “Use-Module”.
>>
>
> Or simply "Export-Names" and "Create-Names".  I like it.
>  ("Export-Module-Names" sounds like it's exporting names of modules not
> names of definitions in a module.)
>
>
>>
>> BUT! Overall, sounds good to me.
>>
>> —Dustin.
>> _______________________________________________
>> hackers mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.opendylan.org/mailman/listinfo/hackers
>>
>
>

_______________________________________________
hackers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.opendylan.org/mailman/listinfo/hackers