[r6rs-discuss] criteria for including or excluding a library
sperber at informatik.uni-tuebingen.de
Fri Nov 3 01:48:05 EST 2006
William D Clinger <will at ccs.neu.edu> writes:
> Could be a SRFI?
> If the library could be implemented portably, with
> reasonable efficiency, using only the rest of R6RS,
> then it could be described by a SRFI and provided by
> a portable reference implementation instead of being
> included within the R6RS.
I suggest that the heading here is misleading. (As Sam TH already
pointed out.) The SRFI process in no way mandates portable reference
implementations, and a number of SRFIs don't. There's another bullet
where the dichotomy becomes evident:
> (r6rs i/o primitive), section 15.2 of the draft R6RS:
> Could be a SRFI? yes
That should be: yes, but requires compiler support
It could be implemented in terms of ports, but that would be putting
the intention of the I/O design on its head, and would incur
significant loss of efficiency.
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla
More information about the r6rs-discuss