Re: call-with-dynamic-root and fluids

[Maciej Stachowiak <mjs at eazel dot com>]

Mikael Djurfeldt <mdj@mdj.nada.kth.se> writes:

> > 
> > Is fluid-let in the classical Scheme/Lisp sense implementable on top
> > of Guile's fluids?
> 
> I guess not.  I actually meant `with-fluids'.
> 
> I'm not quite sure what is the "classical" sense, but I guess it is
> 
> (define a 1)
> 
> (define (foo) a)
> 
> (fluid-let ((a 2)) (foo)) --> a
> 
> Guile's fluids have *mechanism* enough, but it's difficult to disguise
> them as variables...

Maybe we should reconsider the fluid concept, then and just implement
a fluid-let that has sensible semantics with respect to threads.

fluid-let is mroe convenient to use, more familiar to Scheme/Lisp
users, and more likely to be semi-standardized as an SRFI.

 - Maciej