[r6rs-discuss] [ANN] scheme-reports.org

[Pavel Dudrenov]

Maybe module system is to strong of a word then. My ideal solution is:
base language + a well defined set of optional libraries that you can
test for/include in a well define way.


On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Thomas Lord<lord at emf.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-08-24 at 13:33 -0700, Pavel Dudrenov wrote:
>>  is that people would have a standard
>> minimalistic module system already provided, so, hopefully, no one
>> will have the urge to write their own module system as to better split
>> code for projects they are working on.
>
> You can't grab power over future programmers
> that way.  Don't even bother trying.  And you
> shouldn't, anyway - it's rude.
>
> If small scheme has some anemic module system,
> don't act too surprised when people start writing
> their own replacements anyway.
>
> Just give people the essence which, in this matter,
> is just enough so that module system_s_ can be defined
> in SRFIs.
>
> We're already committed to some form of syntactic
> abstraction and lambda: there is nothing more to
> add to the *core* vis a vis modules.
>
> -t
>
>
>