On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 12:33:46PM -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> Taylan Ulrich Bayirli/Kammer scripsit:
>
> > (FWIW I'm leaning towards voting no to all and asking them be optional
> > modules like everything else, as Peter Bex suggested.)
>
> <chair hat="off">
> The thing is, there's no way to do them as Scheme libraries or even
> Scheme-compatible libraries, except to rebind the base numeric procedures
> (as the Chicken egg does), which produces messy results. So I would urge
> you not to do that.
> </chair>

For the record, I wasn't advocating making them available from a module
(which is indeed problematic).

Instead of making them mandatory for the whole thing, I am arguing that
it's sufficient to require them only for systems which choose to offer
libraries which truly require them.

Cheers,
Peter
--
http://www.more-magic.net

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports