> It might well be possible to define such a "free-standing" subset of > R6RS Scheme, although the pervasive influence of Unicode on the > lexical grammar might be a problem. > > Regards, > > Alan
Hi This is also one of the points I think need to be addressed. While 'hosted' and 'free-standing' sounds quite ancient, I would like to propose (and someone else (I cant recall now) said on the nomination list) allowing an implementation to adhere to a certain profile of the standard. This is similar to runtime profiles used in the JVM and CLR. That said, the runtime and the standard libraries should be clearly seperated in the sense that any conforming implementation could make use of a single reference-implementation of the standard libraries based on a specific profile. Personally I feel we should as a community strive to bring something together as a single unit, so that the implementers can worry about their implementations, and not have to 're-invent the wheel'. This will also provide a consistent programming interface for the user. Lastly, the size of the standard libraries should not be a concern, as it does not count towards the size of the language. I think this will benefit the community, and allow more kinds of implementations (such as embedded ones) to be compliant to the current Scheme standard/report. This will also eliminate the 'mocking' of implementations that try to be compliant, but due to costs/time/constraints cannot afford to reach the ultimate level/profile. Cheers leppie _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
