On Nov 14, Arthur A. Gleckler wrote:
> On Nov 14, 2006, at 11:36 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
>
> >> Nevertheless, this doesn't belong in the language specification, and
> >> the spec. certainly shouldn't use the word "portable" to describe
> >> this feature. (It does now.)
> >
> > There is certainly a portability issue.
>
> Perhaps, but the spec. refers to the "#! /usr/bin/env scheme-script"
> line as the "default portable form." But it's portable only to Unix
> systems.
>
> Why should a program running on another operating system be required
> to have Unix-specific details as its first line? What happens when
> some other operating system has a convention that requires different
> text on the first line?
Let me clarify: I dislike *requiring* it, but I do like making some
convention when it *is* used.
> >> An SRFI is the appropriate place for documenting such a convention.
> >
> > SRFIs wouldn't help at this level.
>
> You should say why.
Because you cannot implement a library that will change the way a
Scheme implementation reads the first characters of your program.
--
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://www.barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!
Received on Tue Nov 14 2006 - 15:03:52 UTC