Re: Not loading boot-9.scm

[Mark Galassi <rosalia@cygnus.com>]

    Maciej> The new gh_enter behavior of not loading boot-9.scm is
    Maciej> problematic for apps that want boot-9.scm loaded but don't
    Maciej> want to use gh_repl. Indeed, I think loading or not
    Maciej> loading of boot-9 should be orthogonal to wether or not a
    Maciej> repl is invoked.

Hi Maciej,

I'm looking in to this right now.  I've looked at the ChangeLog and I
am a bit shocked to see that I made such a serious change to the
gh_enter() semantics without discussing it on this list.

Maciej, do you think that it's OK to explicitly invoke

  gh_eval_str ("(primitive-load-path \"ice-9/boot-9.scm\")");

from your programs if you want to use ice-9 without gh_repl()?

JimB, what do you think: does my ChangeLog from November look OK to you?

> 1997-11-24  Mark Galassi  <rosalia@nis.lanl.gov>
> 
> 	* gh_init.c (gh_repl): modified gh_repl() to accept argc and argv
> 	and to invoke scm_shell().
> 	(gh_launch_pad): took out the loading of boot-9.scm from here,
> 	since it is probably best to let the user control that.  In fact,
> 	gh_repl() now invokes scm_shell() which does that.

and if so, what do we do to help with Maciej's configuration dilemma?

    Maciej> I think a good thing to do would be to add a
    Maciej> gh_enter_with_boot_9 which has the old behavior (this
    Maciej> makes the autoconf test easy) or better yet, restore
    Maciej> gh_enter to the old behavior and add a
    Maciej> gh_enter_sans_boot_9.

I prefer the former, since I think it would be good to have gh_enter()
not load boot-9.scm, so that the library users have fine-grained
control over the loading of Scheme code.

Jim, whaddayathink?