[r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Library form should prefix libraries

[Michael Sperber]

John Cowan <cowan at ccil.org> writes:

> Currently a library is represented by a single datum (a library form),
> whereas a top-level program is represented by a sequence of forms.
> The latter is more convenient for both generation and processing,
> and I urge that it be adopted for libraries also.
>
> This can be achieved by moving the export, import, and library-body
> parts of the library out of the library form (typically this amounts
> to moving a single close paren), and copying the language of report
> section 7.1 about "a delimited piece of text" into report section 6.1.

There's been a lot of discussion of this on the ML for SRFI 83,
starting here:

http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-83/mail-archive/msg00002.html

In particular, Matthew Flatt wrote rationale material here:

http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-83/mail-archive/msg00004.html

I'm not sure what you mean by "more convenient for both generation and
processing".  The self-delimiting nature of `library' and the clear
separation of the import/export section from the code body certainly
makes it very easy to process for me.

-- 
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla