[r6rs-discuss] A different take on libraries
trentbuck at gmail.com
Wed Nov 15 09:19:13 EST 2006
On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 12:43:12AM -0500, MichaelL at frogware.com wrote:
> With libraries, though, the syntax is the only layer we get.
> I think there's another way to go, though. Imagine, for example, that
> libraries were designed the way that records are. Imagine that there was a
> procedural layer, and that the syntax was built on top of the procedural
> With this approach, library syntax would change over time, but the changes
> would occur on top of a common foundation. And so the changes would be
> portable--or, at least, they'd have a fighting chance.
This has been worrying me, also. AFAICT there's no way to portably
extend R5.91RS library syntax. I'd like this addressed by a formal
Trent Buck, Student Errant
More information about the r6rs-discuss