[GBBopen-developer] Comments sought on Mini Module :requires option names

[Dan Corkill]

We are in the process of extending the :requires specification in 
define-module to allow a required module specification to be either a 
module name (as it is now) or a list (<module-name> <option>), where 
<option> controls the behavior of issuing a :recompile :propagate on a 
requiring module on the :files in <module-name> module.

There would be two legal values for <option>:

  :read-only -- meaning that no compilation of files in <module-name>
                module would ever be done on behalf of the requiring module

  :protected -- meaning that recompilation due to
                :recompile :propagate would not be performed; only
                compilations that would have been done by a normal
                compile/load of that module (if requested individually)
                would be done

The option name :read-only seems reasonable, but we're looking for ideas on 
a more intuitive keyword for :protected.

Ideas?  (Now's your chance...)

-- Dan

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.