Sorry, I wasn't clear.

The issue isn't with "include" itself.  The problem is how to include eggs with source that will work from the interpreter or compiled. 

Of use/require/require-extension, I haven't found a method of using an egg that will work compiled and interpreted without changing code.  The file demo1.scm is an example of my workaround for compilation.

I haven't had any luck using cond-expand to load/use/require eggs.

Does that make sense?

Is there a way to do this?

Thanks much!

- b

On 9/27/07, felix winkelmann <> wrote:
On 9/24/07, Ben Kurtz <> wrote:
> * I've been asked if there is any way to make sure that files are included,
> and I don't know how to do this in a way that works in both compiled mode
> and in the interpreter.  My current dirty hack is to write files that work
> in the interpreter, and then separate files (ala. demo1.scm ) that are only
> for compilation.  Does anyone have a better way of doing this in Chicken?

I'm not sure I understand completely: The "include" macro includes source
files, both in compiled and interpreted mode. If you want to have pieces
of code that are only for compiled mode, you can wrap them in

  (compiled ...code for compilation...)
  (else ...code for interpretation...) )