This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Guile project.
Re: "environment" unsuitable name for top-level environment
- To: Mikael Djurfeldt <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: "environment" unsuitable name for top-level environment
- From: Jost Boekemeier <firstname.lastname@example.org.TU-Berlin.DE>
- Date: 18 Aug 1999 15:32:53 +0200
- Cc: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
- References: <E11GpUjemail@example.com>
Mikael Djurfeldt <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> The proposed new data type for top-level environments is called
In his original proposal they were called `env' but after a discussion
on this list Jim followed the suggestions and gave them the name `environment'.
> already occupied: It is commonly used when referring to lexical
> environments, in the current Guile implementation and in other Scheme
> implementations, most notably SCM.
Hmm. R5rs also calls them `environment' ("interaction-environment",
"scheme-report-environment" etc.) and as far as I can see SCM does
> I have no suggestion for an alternative name, though.
> Maybe "name-space", "top-level" or "top-level-env" are good?
Can't we call the environment frames simply `env-frame' or something
However I would say that the term "name-space" in unfortunate because
a name space consists of more than one environment: an eval-environmen,
an export-environment and possibly an import-environment.
Just like a /process/ is a /programm/ at run-time a /name space/ is a opened