> | From: Ray Dillinger <[email protected]> > | Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 01:28:58 -0700 > | > | 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.
I'm not sure that is the case. At least in R6 Larceny, you can write the portable (import (foo)) and let the implementation worry about finding the library for you. In other words, finding the library is not part of the programmer's responsibility. Now, there may be some implementation-specific restrictions on where you may /put/ the library in the file system, and what you may call it, but that is not reflected in any way in the syntax of the portable program, and IMO it is not the place of a spec to really nail this down. Andre _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
