[R6RS] Re: strawman module syntax
Sat Jul 10 23:55:46 EDT 2004
At Sat, 10 Jul 2004 14:00:56 -0500 (EST), "R. Kent Dybvig" wrote:
> First of all, let me repeat that I'm not trying to take anything away
> from anyone. If, for example, one wants to structure his or her code in
> such a way that each file contains a single module with a fixed set of
> require forms, that's no problem in the system I propose. If one want's
> to set up an SCPAN repository and require all files in the repository
> to have that form, that's no problem. If Matthew's tools work only for
> files in that form, that's no problem. Just let others write their end
> applications and scripts in whatever form they like. In other words,
> the kind of restrictions you propose should be a matter of policy to be
> applied in appropriate contexts, not language limitation.
I either continue to misunderstand or continue to disagree.
I think that it's this committee's job to figure out the language that
could be used for a SCPAN repository --- that is, a language for
sharing code that reliably runs in multiple implementations.
Meanwhile, if it doesn't matter whether PLT supports R6RS for its
interpreter, environment, compiler, and executable generator, then I'm
even more out of place than I thought.
More information about the R6RS