single vs. multi-sexp modules
Alex Shinn
(13 Jan 2006 08:25 UTC)
|
Re: single vs. multi-sexp modules Per Bothner (14 Jan 2006 03:01 UTC)
|
Re: single vs. multi-sexp modules
bear
(15 Jan 2006 17:25 UTC)
|
Re: single vs. multi-sexp modules
Alex Shinn
(16 Jan 2006 02:05 UTC)
|
Re: single vs. multi-sexp modules
Jim Blandy
(16 Jan 2006 06:13 UTC)
|
Re: single vs. multi-sexp modules
Tony Garnock-Jones
(16 Jan 2006 11:45 UTC)
|
Re: single vs. multi-sexp modules
Alex Shinn
(20 Jan 2006 03:08 UTC)
|
Re: single vs. multi-sexp modules Per Bothner 14 Jan 2006 03:01 UTC
Alex Shinn wrote: > ... and many more. Additions and rebuttals welcome. Finding modules. How does an implementation or a user resolve a module name to a module definition? If there is a single module per "byte stream", then one can give the module name to the byte stream (i.e. a file name). This makes it easy to find a module given its code. -- --Per Bothner xxxxxx@bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/