Goo Nitpicks

[Jonathan Hseu <vomjom@xxxxxxxxxx>]

This is my Goo nitpick list.  Some of my nitpicks you may have good
reasons for... so I'd like to know what they are :)

1. My most important nitpick is the current module system:
It's a big namespace clog to (use) everything, so a lot of us would
probably prefer to use (mod:name)

The problem with (mod:name) is that directories can pile up:
foo/bar/baz/math:$pi

Even simply typing goo/math:$pi is somewhat of a pain.

My proposal is this:
When the programmer types: (use blah)  , it acts as it does now.
When the programmer types: (use goo/math math)  , the second argument
  will be the shortened version.  Then the programmer can type:
  math:$pi to use bindings from that module. (Issue: exported or
  unexported bindings?)

This method would replace the current mod:name

2. swapf vs. rotatef
I personally think you should replace swapf with Common Lisp's rotatef,
which is just more useful.

3. Chris Armstrong's nitpick: string formatting should not be tied to
ports.  Perhaps we should use a separate function for string formatting,
eliminating the need for (msg)

4. Why is DS like: (ds (macro ,blah ,@body)) and not like:
(ds macro (,blah ,@body))?

It seems inconsistent with DF and DM

5. This one isn't a nitpick... but I'd like to know why DF exists when
we could just have DM?

6. *-setter seems too long.  A good replacement might be *-set or *! or
*-set! (see #11)

7. Will we be able to (use)/import from the current directory where goo
is run?

8. This is probably just a bug: (dv) always returns #f and not the value
you assign to the variable.

9. DS example on the web is wrong.  It should be 'unless' and not 'when'

(empty)'s signature on the web is also wrong.

10. Is there a way to get a subset of a sequence?  It seems as if there
should be a builtin function for it.

11. Rename (set) to (set!) because it is destructive?

12. From what I read on wiki, you intend to have default values look
like: (dm asdf (a:1|<int> b:2|<int>))

Maybe it's just me, but default variables in functions should be
consistent with variable assignment in rep and let, for example:
(dm asdf ((a 1)|<int> (b 2)|<int>))

13. Functions like (trunc/) return a tuple.  If users wanted a
remainder, they would probably use (mod).  I think (trunc/) should
return 2 values, but it should work like common lisp's
(multiple-value-bind), if you want those two values, you ask for it,
otherwise it just gives one value.

Unless I'm mistaken, you have to do: (1st (trunc/ 5 3)) to get the
result of the division... it's too much typing.

14. Oh yeah, push and pop are broken for lists.  This is just a bug.

There are a few more, but I will wait for comments on these :)

Thanks.

-- 
Jonathan Hseu <vomjom@vomjom.org, vomjom@debian.org, jh4@cec.wustl.edu>
GPG ID:          5228D713
GPG fingerprint: 220B A4EF 70FE B884 CB38  F93F EA8A 1024 5228 D713