On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 02:45:02PM -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> Peter Bex scripsit:
>
> > The other way around it does shut out implementations like Chicken
> > where the "er-macro-transformer" line is more or less optional because
> > that's its native system.
>
> Chicken is not shut out.  It just means that WG2-conformant programs
> have to use "er-macro-transformer" explicitly.  What happens if you
> don't use an explicit transformer is outside the scope of the standard,

Right, but Andy is advocating to standardize that unless I completely
misunderstood.

> so Chicken can treat that as implicit ER and other implementations as
> something else.
>
> This is the advantage of standardizing a facade rather than what lies
> beneath.

Indeed.

Cheers,
Peter
--
http://sjamaan.ath.cx
--
"The process of preparing programs for a digital computer
 is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically
 and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic
 experience much like composing poetry or music."
							-- Donald Knuth

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