On Wed, Nov 14 2012, Alex Shinn wrote: > Then why can you say that a REPL "should" support redefinition? > (Without defining what redefinition means.) > > This refers to redefining variables and syntax in general. > > For the specific case of redefining record types we could > add a note that existing instances may or may not be > mapped to the new type according to some unspecified > semantics, but I'm not sure if such a note adds anything.
Just figured out that neither include nor load can be used to define/redefine libraries. So libraries are immutable and there is no portable way to "add" new libraries, right? Helmut _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
