John Cowan wrote: > Alaric Snell-Pym scripsit: > >> How about letting implementations provide the symbols defined by >> feature-modules by default, making importing them optional? > > So that would mean that "(import inexacts)" does nothing if you have > inexact numbers, and just reports an error if you don't? (Okay, some > Schemes might be able to load inexact number support, but nobody > does that today.) > > I suppose I could live with that, but it seems very weird.
Weird or not, but SLIB did just that for a long time. It threats both "modules" and "feature groups" from your proposal as "features" [1] which can be required in exactly the same way -- the difference being some features are implemented via loadable code, while others are intrinsic. [1] http://people.csail.mit.edu/jaffer/slib_1.html _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
