On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Aaron W. Hsu <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 04:28:58 -0400, Ray Dillinger <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Can we at least agree that a developer, having read the Thing One >> report, should be able to *use* the module system without making >> guesses as to how a particular implementation organizes it? R6RS >> failed to address finding standard modules in an installed system. > > It failed to address this for good reason. A lanugage standard is a > standard for a language, an Thing One should be first and formost a > language document, not some document about how to implement this language. > Identifying how to find and load libraries necessarily restricts the > domain of use to systems that *have* the mechanism described. It makes no > sense to take very implementation specific features and stuff them where > they do not belong.
Your assertion is that the module system will be constructed using the language? _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
