> Simple. He doesn't care about static nature, and wants *everything* > to be dynamic.
Yes, exactly. But I'm not just asserting this as a personal preference, which can battle forever against other people's personal preferences. I'm claiming that the difference between these two preferences is precisely (well, more or less precisely :-) the difference between R6-haters and R6-lovers, and therefore, precisely the reason why we have this WG1/WG2 business in the first place. Actually I'm making an empirical claim that I'm not quite 100% sure is true, a little like Kant's claims about the equivalence of his various statements of the Categorical Imperative. The claim is that the following are at least roughly equivalent: * everything dynamic * "Languages should..." * The only meaning of any form is its REPL meaning * Macros are an overlay on Lisp, which is Scheme's essence I hereby name all of the above "the WG1ical Imperative." _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
