On 09/10/2009 03:31 PM, Brian Harvey wrote:
>> It's a requirement for one style of interactive debugging.
>> It may not be practical if you have a compiler that does
>> compile-time name binding or inlining or type-checking, for example.
>
> Grump. Languages should be designed, not by deciding what makes life easy
> for a compiler, but by deciding what makes life easy for the user!
Nonsense. Implementability and performance matter quite a bit.
> I'll be very, very, very, very, very upset if we end up with a standard
> that breaks the very simple model of interaction that we've had for 50
> years.
There are different languages, different implementations, and
different "markets". Performance and/or compile-time error
reporting are valuable to many of us. Those feature aren't
necessarily in conflict with "a very simple model of interaction",
but it may be not doable given limited resources. So if R7RS
specifies a REPL it probably needs to make "the very simple model
of interaction" be optional rather than required.
--
--Per Bothner
[email protected] http://per.bothner.com/
_______________________________________________
r6rs-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
