William D Clinger
will at ccs.neu.edu
Thu Jan 25 19:22:46 EST 2007
> > * "Implementation-specific facilities may also be mentioned" (#64,
> > #77, #128) - in responses relating to dropping of declarations.
> I have no clue what this might be. Did any of the response authors
> have anything specific in mind?
It was my understanding that the non-normative appendix
would explain that R6RS-conformant implementations are
allowed to provide unsafe versions of the standard
libraries and/or unsafe modes in their compilers by
any means whatsoever, including the use of command-line
options and/or challenge/response protocols that would
prevent people from using safe mode by accident.
Of course, my understanding is completely incompatible
with the language contained within the most recent
revision to document/basic.tex. That revision is also
completely incompatible with the plain language of the
official responses to formal comments #64, #77, and
More information about the R6RS