Hello,
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 6:26 PM, Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> wrote: > Hello, > > > I know that supporting other peoples' r6rs programs is also a reason, > but I > > think that Guile should be able to use the libraries it itself > > bundles. > > I agree in general, yes. But when the run-time footprint can be reduced > at little cost, it seems nice to do it. > > > And in theory, using RnRS libraries is nice because it promotes > > portable Scheme code. (I do agree that R6RS is a sort of weird case, > > because a lot of it is different names for features that Guile already > > has in another form. I'm not sure if that changes this or not.) > > Exactly: the problem I have with R6RS is that it basically re-implements > several SRFIs or APIs otherwise available in Guile, sometimes just for > dubious aesthetic reasons–e.g., SRFI-1, SRFI-9, SRFI-3[45]. > Traditionally ice-9 modules have not used them. > Yes, I agree with everything you said here. I'm torn, because I think that in general having more portable Scheme code is good for everyone, and the RnRS standards are the best way to do that, so maybe we should just accept that the most recent 1 or 2 standards will always be loaded. But on the other hand, that doesn't mean that this particular module needs to use them. Noah
