Re: Hideshow
Steve Youngs <sryoungs(a)bigpond.net.au> wrote:
Yeah, well, you try to think straight when your coffee's getting
cold,
the kids are screaming at you, your wife wants more money to buy god
knows what, and you can't find your smokes!
It'll all be worth it when your kids get the high-paying basketball
contracts and put you and your wife in Nikes for the rest of your lives.
An afterthought: Would PUI benefit if we split the $REQUIRES into
"$BUILD_REQUIRES" and "$RUN_REQUIRES"? And I bet that wouldn't
be as
easy as what I hope it would be. :-(
Yes, it would benefit, and no it wouldn't be easy. For one thing, next
you'd want to have a "$RUN_WOULD_WORK_BETTER_WITH_BUT_CAN_DO_WITHOUT" or
"$RUN_IF_YOU_PLAN_TO_PRESS_CTRL_C_Y_BUT_OTHERWISE_YOU_DONT_NEED_THIS".
On the other hand, this touches on a subject I've thought about some. I
think it would be really useful to have a general Lisp cross-referencing
tool, something that would tell us that package foo makes calls to
functions defined in packages bar and baz. If we had such a tool, we
could:
- automatically compute both compile-time and (the maximal set of)
run-time dependencies between packages;
- tell users when they try to invoke functionality in an uninstalled
package, and maybe even offer to download and install the missing
package.
I even have the hubris to think I know how to construct such a tool.
What I want to know is this: where do I put the information? It'll be
fairly large, but it needs to be distributed with the packages somehow
if we are going to use it for the second item above. That's why I asked
on xemacs-design awhile back if that kind of information could be
stuffed into the package index somewhere. What do you think?
--
Jerry James, father of 3 1/2 kids
http://www.ittc.ku.edu/~james/