On Mon, 2009-08-24 at 11:49 -0400, John Cowan wrote: > 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 don't consider something like REQUIRE to be a module system but I do (e.g. slib) think it perfectly reasonable for libraries and appropriate to a language of small size. What is specifically not desirable in a small language is the hair of multiple top-level namespaces with exports and imports among them. -t _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
