This is the mail archive of the guile@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the Guile project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Names in libguile


"Greg J. Badros" <gjb@cs.washington.edu> writes:

> Mikael Djurfeldt <mdj@mdj.nada.kth.se> writes:
> 
> Again, I prefer that all such documents are included in the
> distribution-- it's twenty times harder for someone w/o CVS access to
> find those files if they want to take a peek (perhaps because we point
> them at the document when they ask a question).

IMO, every document that is relevant to a user of Guile should be
distributed, although not if it is so incomplete or out of date as to
be misleading.

Documents that are only relevant to development of Guile (various
policies) only need to be in CVS and not in the distributions. I don't
think it is possile to usefully hack Guile at this point without using
anoncvs (when I finish setting snapshots back up); it's changing fast
enough that patches to a stable release are unlikely to apply cleanly
to the latest sources anyway.

And the goal of documentation is not to provide as much information as
possible, but to provide relevant information in a well-organized
way. Too much documentation can make it harder for the user to find
the information her or she is actually looking for.

Addressing the more specific issue, I think the naming policy is
useful as end-user documentation, especially if we state that it is
both the required naming policy for Guile itself, and our recommeneded
policy for Guile extensions and applications. This will give users
guidance on the logic behind the naming schemes and help them be
consistent in their own code.

 - Maciej

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]