[r6rs-discuss] Interpreters need not apply?

From: Thomas Lord <lord>
Date: Wed Mar 7 02:50:16 2007

Abdulaziz Ghuloum wrote:
>
> Aubrey, what's this class of "pure interpreters" that you're concerned
> about? How do they semantically differ from say petite, csi, gsi,
> mzscheme, guile, gosh, rscheme, etc?

Doesn't adding the word "semantically" to that question rather miss the
point?

Did anyone deny that the current R6 draft could be implemented, portably,
atop any R5 implementation, including SCM?

-t
Received on Wed Mar 07 2007 - 02:59:12 UTC