On Fri, 04 Sep 2009 04:05:52 -0400, Vitaly Magerya <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Aaron W. Hsu wrote:
>>> [SRFI 39] parameterize
>>
>> Parameters are nice, but also easily implemented. I don't see a reason
>> to
>> put them in the base.
>
> Unfortunately they're not. The reference implementation breaks under
> any Scheme that has concurrency. Additionally, supporting SRFI-39 means
> that `current-input-port' and `current-output-port' are also parameter
> objects; you won't have that by simply using reference implementation.
I'm not familiar with the reference implementation, but how exactly does
it break in concurrency? If you desire thread local parameters, that's a
different concept than normal parameters, which have their state shared
across threads.
I think that we could safely throw I/O out of the core Scheme, and move it
to a standard that specified the parameter standard as a prerequesite,
too. This would be a good thing, IMO.
Aaron W. Hsu
--
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its
victims may be the most oppressive. -- C. S. Lewis
_______________________________________________
r6rs-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
