Re: one more uffi thing

Cyrus Harmon wrote:
> def-function has module as a keyword arg and def-foreign-var has it as 
> a required argument. Can/should these two match? I don't use lispworks, 
> so it doesn't seem to matter for me. Just trying to make things 
> consistent.

[cc: uffi-devel list]

Hi Cyrus, 

Consistency is a good thing. Yes, matching module parameters would be
better. The def-foreign-var macro was graciously submitted as a patch
and unfortunately I didn't consider the parameter list closely.

Some number of packages depend upon def-foreign-var. More importantly,
there's know way for me to know just what packages depend upon that
macro. Thus, I don't think a change that breaks current applications
just to improve consistency across functions is warranted.[1]

So, while making module a keyword argument for compatibility, I don't
see it worthwhile to break existing applications. The parameter could
be made optional, but that really defeats the purpose of using
UFFI. People using the application on Lispworks may have difficulty
using the application if the programmer decided not to supply the
optional module parameter.

Kevin

[1] The paradox of maintaining libraries that people actually use --
some improvements are not made due to need not to break applications
that use the library.

-- 
Kevin Rosenberg
kevin-HJRc7zDS/[email protected]