On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 15:16:00 -0400, Shiro Kawai <[email protected]> wrote:

> From: "Aaron W. Hsu" <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [r6rs-discuss] Import choices: flexibility vs.  
> discoverability
> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 00:34:15 -0400
>
>> I have thought about this problem a little more, because I believe this  
>> is
>> going to be a very important issue to Scheme.
> [...]
>>
>>      
>> <http://my.opera.com/arcfide/blog/2009/10/14/a-philosophy-on-scheme-modules>
>
> Thanks for the writeup.  This clearified my thought a lot.
> I agree that the confusion came from that we are conflating
> different concepts in module primitives.
>
> I've been asking if John's proposed module system can support
> static discoverability, but I myself is not an advocate of it.
> Gauche's module system is a lot closer than "syntactic" or
> "dynamic" construct as in Aaron's proposal.   Yet Gauche has
> some support to ensure that my packaged application include
> everything it needs, so that it runs on the client machine
> without stopping to say "can't find module xxx" or "unbound
> variable".   So I think it may be a datapoint to show that
> dynamism can coexist with "industrial" use case.

As another more explicit example, you can see the Chez Scheme User's  
Guide, which details some extensions to its module system that allows  
things like abstract modules, mutually recursive separately compilable  
module, separate interface and implementation, &c. Since these can be  
defined portably if the underlying module system is syntactic, then  
implementations can choose to provide them natively and do optimization or  
other debugging niceties with them, or a portable version could do much of  
that as well. Thus, we can get both, if we wanted to.

        <http://www.scheme.com/csug8/syntax.html#./syntax:h4>


        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

Reply via email to