[r6rs-discuss] Re: [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations

From: Matthias Felleisen <matthias>
Date: Sun Feb 25 22:43:18 2007

On Feb 25, 2007, at 10:21 PM, r6rs-discuss-request_at_lists.r6rs.org wrote:

> Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 20:45:01 -0500
> From: William D Clinger <will_at_ccs.neu.edu>
> Subject: Re: [r6rs-discuss] Re: [Formal] Allow compilers to reject
> obvious violations
> To: r6rs-discuss_at_lists.r6rs.org
> Message-ID: <E1HLUvF-0006zU-Nz_at_adara.ccs.neu.edu>
>
> I am posting this as an individual member of the Scheme
> community. I am not speaking for the R6RS editors, and
> this message should not be confused with the editors'
> eventual formal response.
>
> Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>> Denotational semantics isn't executable. An operational semantics
>> approximating the enumeration behavior of denotational semantics is.
>
> Was I too charitable?

Whatever.

;; ---

You keep evading my real question. So can you produce an algorithmic
description of when you will allow compilers to give up?

-- Matthias
Received on Sun Feb 25 2007 - 22:43:05 UTC