> Almost every Scheme system worth its salt has some means of encapsulating > a set of definitions and expressions and providing controlled visibility > to those bindings created in some fashion.
Actually, /every/ Scheme without exception has such a means; it's called LAMBDA. See SICP 2.5.1 for example. It seems to me that anyone who wishes to apply the adjective "Schemely" to a module/package system other than LAMBDA faces a very high burden of proof. Certainly anyone who proposes a module/package system other than LAMBDA for WG1 Scheme faces an /extremely/ high burden of proof. Yes, I know that the Steering Commitee feels otherwise. The SC members, while in many ways godly, are not quite God and can be wrong. I believe that they are wrong about this point. _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
