[R6RS] Re: strawman module syntax

Michael Sperber sperber
Sun Jul 11 04:46:53 EDT 2004

>>>>> "Kent" == R Kent Dybvig <dyb at cs.indiana.edu> writes:

Kent> First of all, let me repeat that I'm not trying to take anything away
Kent> from anyone. [...]

I don't think either Matthew or I took it that way.  Neither am I
trying to take away anything from your proposal.  All I'm trying to
say is that what you want should be done with a mechanism different
from what we want.

>> While this may be a nice language design aspect, it fails to take into
>> account separate compilation and how pieces of code residing in
>> different files refer to each other while avoiding name conflicts.
>> (Matthew is arguing why things shouldn't expand into top-level MODULE
>> from another angle.)

>> Could you elaborate on this issue?

Kent> As I understand Matthew's proposal, the language specified by
Kent> the implicit require form determines the syntax for the entire
Kent> contents of the module, including explicit require and provide
Kent> forms, if any.  So it's not possible for a compilation system to
Kent> determine what a module requires or provides without expanding
Kent> macros.

It seems to me you're replying to a different issue put forth further
down in my proposal.  I'm still wondering how things like separate
compilation, determining dependencies and so forth would work in the
system you propose.  (Note that the word "macro" doesn't appear in the
paragraph you're responding to.)

>> Note that I'm not proposing to abolish the interactive top level.

Kent> You certainly seem to be saying that 3 isn't a program except in the
Kent> interactive environment.  What am I missing?

My mistake: I shouldn't have said "interactive."  Let me clarify: A
program in the module language is not a program in the core language
or vice versa.  You're saying that's a bad thing.  I'm saying it's a
good thing, and it's not causing any pragmatic problem in practice in
either MzScheme or Scheme 48.  (There are a few semantic issues, but
those could be resolved.)

Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, V?lkerverst?ndigung und ?berhaupt blabla

More information about the R6RS mailing list