Thomas Lord scripsit: > I hope that small Scheme does *not* include a module system but large > scheme does.
Your hope has failed: http://www.scheme-reports.org/2009/working-group-1-charter.html says: # The language developed by working group 1 must include support for # macros and modules/libraries in a way that is appropriate for the # language's small size. I suppose you *could* read that as "the appropriate size is none at all", but that would be perverse. > I also hope that small Scheme has a "weaker" semantics. E.g., small > Scheme requiring no more than a subset of ASCII characters, big Scheme > requiring at least Unicode. Which ASCII characters did you plan to leave out? All but [ ] { } | are already in use in R5RS. Everyone, please read the charter. > I think it's strange, therefore, to regard big Scheme as small Scheme > plus libraries. I agree that this is an unnecessary restriction on both Schemes. -- John Cowan [email protected] http://ccil.org/~cowan If a soldier is asked why he kills people who have done him no harm, or a terrorist why he kills innocent people with his bombs, they can always reply that war has been declared, and there are no innocent people in an enemy country in wartime. The answer is psychotic, but it is the answer that humanity has given to every act of aggression in history. --Northrop Frye _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
