[R6RS] I/O <-> GC question

[Marc Feeley]

> >>>>> "Will" == William D Clinger <William> writes:
> 
> Will> I think you're worrying about things at too low a level. 
> 
> I was worrying that somebody would try to make an indirect inference
> about the nature of my upcoming proposal---I guess that's valid, but
> really something I'd prefer to discuss later.  (If you're interested,
> I'd be happy to clue you in to what I've got, though.)
> 
> Right now, I'm more interested in the answer to my question. :-)

Michael, I think a more transparent approach to designing the I/O
system would be preferable.  As I hinted to in a previous message it
would be good to give us a rough idea of the problems you are tackling
and the solutions you are considering.  I want to avoid the situation
where you spend a lot of time on things that will find minimal
acceptance among the other editors.  Please fill us in on your
objectives and design philosophy.  Let's start by an analysis of the
R5RS deficiencies with respect to I/O.  Moreover, can you explain
clearly what you like/dislike about the I/O system I discussed with
you and Matthew at Snowbird (which is essentially the one in Gambit).

Marc