Aaron W. Hsu scripsit: > This makes life difficult for the syntactic module crowd.
I haven't read your proposal yet, but please explain what syntactic modules and non-syntactic modules are. > Whatever happens, I don't think Cond-expand should go into the standard, I think it should be provided as a useful shim device. Ideally it shouldn't exist, but one often needs just a bit of glue. > and certainly no module system should be tied to it. The only connection between the two is that if a module exists, cond-expand knows about it along with whatever other implementation-specific things it knows about. -- Values of beeta will give rise to dom! John Cowan (5th/6th edition 'mv' said this if you tried http://www.ccil.org/~cowan to rename '.' or '..' entries; see [email protected] http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/odd.html) _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
