On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 2:47 PM, John Cowan <[email protected]> wrote:


> > Specifically, suppose Kawa implements R7RS as far as we can.
>
> Just so.  In that case, providing "r7rs" would be a Good Thing.
>

Still, it would be a disservice to provide it in an implementation that
didn't support tail recursion, for example, since that's a basic feature of
the language and many programs won't work without it.  It would be better
to agree on a feature identifier that such languages can support.  This can
be outside the spec, for example in an SRFI.
_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports

Reply via email to