On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 10:51:42 -0400, David Rush <[email protected]> wrote:
> I am starting to suspect that the only truly correct way to move
> forward on macro modularity is to rebase the notion of a Scheme system
> as a purely interpreted textual language.
You seem to be arguing:
1. Module systems shouldn't need to be anything more than Lambda and
Load.
2. Macros can not be modularized with lambda and load.
3. Ergo, we should get rid of Scheme as we know it.
I don't want a new language, I want the same language I have been using
carefully and properly standardized.
Aaron W. Hsu
--
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its
victims may be the most oppressive. -- C. S. Lewis
_______________________________________________
r6rs-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
