[Scheme-reports] General comments on the draft WG1 R7 report. Jay Reynolds Freeman (27 May 2011 02:12 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] General comments on the draft WG1 R7 report. Jay Reynolds Freeman (28 May 2011 06:44 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] General comments on the draft WG1 R7 report. Andre van Tonder (28 May 2011 16:54 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] General comments on the draft WG1 R7 report. Jay Reynolds Freeman (28 May 2011 18:25 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] General comments on the draft WG1 R7 report. Jay Reynolds Freeman (29 May 2011 04:26 UTC)

Re: [Scheme-reports] General comments on the draft WG1 R7 report. Andre van Tonder 28 May 2011 16:53 UTC

On Fri, 27 May 2011, Shiro Kawai wrote:

> So, even for REPL implementations, phase separation is a concern.

Yes, and if the REPL enforces phase separation properly, your programs
will have the nice invariance of continuing to work (in most instances) even
once you compile it.

If not, you run into the classic problem of programs tested in the REPL
running fine and then blowing up mysteriously once compiled because of phase
problems.

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