This is the mail archive of the
guile@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the Guile project.
Re: Unwanted hook names (was Re: interface reductions)
- To: Mikael Djurfeldt <mdj at mdj dot nada dot kth dot se>
- Subject: Re: Unwanted hook names (was Re: interface reductions)
- From: "Greg J. Badros" <gjb at cs dot washington dot edu>
- Date: 26 May 2000 08:08:11 -0700
- Cc: Dirk Herrmann <dirk at ida dot ing dot tu-bs dot de>, Michael Livshin <mlivshin at bigfoot dot com>, Miroslav Silovic <silovic at zesoi dot fer dot hr>, Guile Mailing List <guile at sourceware dot cygnus dot com>, djurfeldt at nada dot kth dot se
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0005261208330.7713-100000@marvin.ida.ing.tu-bs.de> <xy7og5tr2vj.fsf@mdj.nada.kth.se>
Mikael Djurfeldt <mdj@mdj.nada.kth.se> writes:
> Dirk Herrmann <dirk@ida.ing.tu-bs.de> writes:
>
> > Thus, as an intermediate solution I suggest to do the following:
> > #define SCM_HOOK_NAME(h) scm_object_property (h, scm_makfrom0str ("name"))
> > and let scm_make_hook_with_name and scm_create_hook set the corresponding
> > property, but also deprecate these functions. Thus, there is a chance to
> > update old code while we can already change the internal representation.
> >
> > Shall I go ahead and do it that way?
>
> Except for scm_create_hook, yes.
Agreed.
scm_create_hook is a convenience function for doing all of those
things-- it's targetting making the application-writer's job easier, and
as such, needs the name to be easily added.
Greg