[R6RS] Timeline for R6RS SRFIs
Thu Jun 2 09:44:05 EDT 2005
On 2-Jun-05, at 8:30 AM, Michael Sperber wrote:
> That's why I said we can just drop all but the imperative layer for
> consideration for R6RS, if that's what everybody wants. The nice
> thing about it is that it isn't monolithic, after all.
As far as I can tell the imperative section of SRFI 68 goes beyond
the requirements we agreed to in Boston. It also refers to the
stream layer (e.g. input-port-stream, set-input-port-stream!), so
strictly speaking that section is not self contained. I'm also
concerned about backward compatibility (e.g. read-char seems to
return an integer and the procedure eof-object? no longer exists).
Could you make a specific self contained proposal that would address
More information about the R6RS