[r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Allow compilers to reject obvious violations

[Arthur A. Gleckler]

On Feb 26, 2007, at 9:13 AM, John Cowan wrote:

> Arthur A. Gleckler scripsit:
>
>> We've already dropped one of the core features of the language, its
>> REPL, from the specification.  Let's not go any further and lose the
>> prototyping-friendly nature of the language.
>
> Can you mention the part of R5RS that mandates a REPL?

I didn't say that R5RS mandated a REPL.  I said that the REPL had  
been removed from the spec.  Note that LOAD, for example, is gone.

I can't find a reference right now, but I recall reading that a  
decision had been made not to address interactive use any more  
because the authors couldn't agree on the semantics.  Please forgive  
me if I'm misremembering.

In any case, one of the great things about Scheme and Lisp in general  
has always been their support for interactive, experimental use.  If  
we have to patch an entire program before any part of it can be run,  
we will have lost another part of this interactive, experimental nature.