[r6rs-discuss] meta r6rs

From: Thomas Lord <lord>
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 21:29:26 -0700

Aubrey Jaffer wrote:
> 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?
>


That seems a trivial detail, to me. For example, in other SRFIs,
people could propose alternative syntaxes, explaining how they
relate to the draft library system. Meanwhile, none of that has
any effect on whether or not the treatment of uniform arrays
is useful.

In the longer term, the draft (repurposed as SRFIs) could be better
modularized, with orthogonal features labeled with separate
SRFI titles. In that framework, we can work out how to treat
R6 libraries even while we benefit from some of the other work.

-t
Received on Sat Jun 09 2007 - 00:29:26 UTC