On Sep 17, 2009, at 4:19 AM, Brian Mastenbrook wrote: > What problems would creating an unnecessary instantiation of a > library cause?
This has been beaten to death. For myself, I don't want to go over it at this time. [time's too precious] > Having imports without level declarations "implicitly" phased is not > generally possible for separate-instantiation systems (which need to > instantiate the library *before* deciding that the binding access > should be allowable). This is false. One *can* do both implicit phasing and multiple instantiations just like how one *can* do explicit phasing with single instantiation, or the other two combinations. This too has been beaten to death. Aziz,,, _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
