[r6rs-discuss] meta r6rs

From: Aubrey Jaffer <agj>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 22:05:17 -0400 (EDT)

 | Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2007 23:40:21 -0700
 | From: Thomas Lord <lord at emf.net>
 |
 | ...
 |
 | Publication as a SRFI, not as R6, would restore the community's
 | ability to work side by side. SRFI's are non-rival. If
 | some in the community doesn't like the way a particular SRFI
 | is going, they are free to create an alternative SRFI. Neither
 | SRFI is more legitimate than the other, but probably one will
 | eventually emerge as more popular than the other. Contrast
 | that with R6RS: if a splinter group decided to publish their
 | own, alternative R6RS, immediately the question would arise
 | "which R6RS is legitimately titled? which is the authority?"
 | The splinter group would most likely be disregarded on that
 | basis alone.

The current form of the R6RS library system would seem to be
incompatible with SRFIs. Because the top-level form in an R6RS
library file must be (library ...), there is no opportunity for an
enclosing COND-EXPAND form.

Aren't R6RS library files are incompatible with R5RS files?
Received on Fri Jun 08 2007 - 22:05:17 UTC