Re: [Scheme-reports] library at file level (was: Ratification vote for R7RS Small)
John Cowan 14 May 2013 13:35 UTC
Aaron W. Hsu scripsit:
> You lose the ability to separately compile modules, so they do not
> replace compilation units like `define-library`,
Can you update LetSyntaxArcfide into a proposal for WG2 that supplements
rather than replaces `define-library`? I would be glad to consider such
a thing.
> but they excel at replacing `let-syntax` or for modularizing circularly
> dependent code.
Please try to keep a grip on the fact that R7RS-small `let-syntax`, like
the R5RS version, is a scope rather than being spliced into the surrounding
scope. See ticket #48 and WG1Ballot2Results.
--
How comes city and country to be filled with drones John Cowan
and rogues, our highways with hackers, and all cowan@ccil.org
places with sloth and wickedness? http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
--W. Blith, Eng. Improver Improved, 1652
_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports