Peter Bex scripsit:

> If an implementation doesn't support hash tables, it might not need
> comparators either.  This is the same objection as I have with requiring
> the full numeric tower.

Where do you draw the line?  Lots of useful Scheme programs don't use
vectors for anything: do you advocate making them merely optional
as well?  If not, why not?

> I don't see why this has to be.  It will just exclude small
> specialised implementations which would still like to support
> a standardised library if it fits its intended use cases.

There's no reason *not* to exclude small specialized implementations
from a large standard.  That doesn't mean the implementations
can't support libraries from -large if they want to:  I assume
lots of libraries will work with Chibi even if they are not
packaged with it.

> For example, Chibi Scheme might decide to ship a few WG2 modules,
> but you can compile it without bignum support.  Does that mean
> it isn't WG2-compatible?

If that ballot question passes, then yes, Chibi will not be R7RS-large
compliant when compiled without bignum support.  Nothing wrong with that.

--
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        cowan@ccil.org
        Is it not written, "That which is written, is written"?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "scheme-reports-wg2" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scheme-reports-wg2+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.