Arthur A. Gleckler scripsit: > Would you be willing to write a little bit about how this proposal > compares to what different Scheme implementations already provide?
AFAIK, only Kawa and MIT provide pathnames as a built-in, though there may be external packages that provide them on other systems. MIT is essentially CL in semantics, whereas Kawa is mostly about URIs. > Also, what's the motivation for unifying the API for URLs with that > for filenames? That they are basically the same thing, and that URLs are essentially a mostly-upward-compatible extension. Distinct parsers are needed because an URL is technically a valid Posix pathname, though a very unlikely one. -- John Cowan [email protected] http://ccil.org/~cowan The penguin geeks is happy / As under the waves they lark The closed-source geeks ain't happy / They sad cause they in the dark But geeks in the dark is lucky / They in for a worser treat One day when the Borg go belly-up / Guess who wind up on the street. _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
