On Mon, 2009-08-24 at 13:33 -0700, Pavel Dudrenov wrote:
>  is that people would have a standard
> minimalistic module system already provided, so, hopefully, no one
> will have the urge to write their own module system as to better split
> code for projects they are working on.

You can't grab power over future programmers
that way.  Don't even bother trying.  And you
shouldn't, anyway - it's rude.

If small scheme has some anemic module system,
don't act too surprised when people start writing
their own replacements anyway.

Just give people the essence which, in this matter,
is just enough so that module system_s_ can be defined
in SRFIs.

We're already committed to some form of syntactic
abstraction and lambda: there is nothing more to 
add to the *core* vis a vis modules.

-t



_______________________________________________
r6rs-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss

Reply via email to