Derick Eddington <[email protected]> writes: > [1] http://groups.google.com/group/ikarus-users/msg/8392014ed8902e4c
As the post points out, optimally resolving library constraints is hard. That's because figuring out a correct link of sets of libraries from different sources its hard: The R6RS constraint language merely allows you to express that complexity. I agree that this complexity is frustrating, but at this point, I see it pretty much as a fact of life. It does this mostly because of my bad experience with more limited schemes (greatly over schemes without versioning - look at the trouble the Java people have, for instance), and I still prefer the R6RS scheme to the others I've seen. I didn't expect realistic Scheme implementations to implement an optimal constraint solver. (BTW, Richard Kelsey's implementation of SRFI 7 - which supports something similar - also has a limited solver in it.) Rather, I expected either the implementation to make simplicistic choices as it goes along, or the user who assembles a final product to specify (via a "linker command line" or some other external mechanism) what versions she actually wants to satisfy the constraints. -- Cheers =8-} Mike Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla
