Christian Jaeger christian@pflanze.mine.nu writes:
Joel J. Adamson wrote:
[...]
What is the status of the namespace mechanism supported or not? Will it be in the future?
[...]
It's not clear yet to me how well layering would/will work, e.g. mixing code using both the namespaces feature and future chjmodule functionality; you're seeing such problems currently with syntax-case, but that may be rather just because nobody has spent much effort on integrating syntax-case better (well, I could be wrong, I don't know about the issues).)
I got my code to work and I think I understand the ##namespace mechanism much better. Now my concern is that if I'm building an application (my ultimate goal) am I going to have to re-work everything once a module system gets implemented. I really like how fast Gambit development happens: it's already enabled me to implement things I expected to be there, simply by voicing it to the newgroup. I also know that Gambit has some good advantages over most other implementations.
However, being a limited-time "spare-time" programmer, is my time to learn things better spent on another implementation with slower development and more stable (as in "probably not going to be reimplemented in such a way that you would have to change large portions of code") features? Is Gambit meant for building applications, or is it meant as a testing ground for features of a scheme implementation?
Joel