Re: [Scheme-reports] "module" vs. "library"
Alaric Snell-Pym 08 Jul 2011 09:47 UTC
On 07/07/11 18:52, John Cowan wrote:
> As I've pointed out before, application programmers don't really need to
> make their code portable between Schemes any more, because each Scheme
> (with a very few exceptions) is itself highly portable. It's library
> programmers that really need and benefit from standardization.
+1
An app that doesn't use any non-portable features (GUIs? Means of
packaging apps for distribution, even?) is often rather boring.
This is also why I'd like to leave REPL semantics vague...
ABS
--
Alaric Snell-Pym
http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/alaric/
_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
