sperber at informatik.uni-tuebingen.de
Tue Jun 20 04:23:51 EDT 2006
Thanks for posting this---it is probably acceptable to me.
I would prefer a variant with the following modifications relative to
- I'd prefer if the eval and run phases were the same. As the imports
themselves are determined statically, this allows `eval' to the same
module state as the running code. Separating them and thus having
`eval' potentially instantiating modules all over the place, would I
conjecture, be quite surprising to most users.
- I'd like to keep `eval-libraries' as an <impexp-form>, and turn
`environment' back into a procedure that accepts an arbitrary number
of arguments, each being an S-expression representing an
This makes the set of libraries available to `eval' a bit more
static than in your proposal (no macro-expansion), but the actual
<import-specs> more dynamic (run time rather than expansion time).
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla
More information about the R6RS