Andy Wingo scripsit:

> Include is valuable, no doubt about it.  However `load' with relative
> paths does not make any portable kind of sense.  If you want to load
> code at runtime portably, build an absolute path.

Absolute paths are less portable than relative ones -- why, Windows and
Posix don't even agree on what an absolute path looks like, not to mention
that different systems are laid out differently.  Relative paths with
slashes (which the Windows kernel is fine with, though various parts of the
UI insist on backslashes) are the nearest thing to portability we have.

--
You annoy me, Rattray!  You disgust me!         John Cowan
You irritate me unspeakably!  Thank Heaven,     cowan@ccil.org
I am a man of equable temper, or I should       http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
scarcely be able to contain myself before
your mocking visage.            --Stalky imitating Macrea

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports