[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix r4rs, , r4rs-null and r5rs-null module
From: |
Peter Bex |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix r4rs, , r4rs-null and r5rs-null modules |
Date: |
Mon, 16 Oct 2017 10:43:20 +0200 |
User-agent: |
NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) |
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 04:29:55PM +1300, Evan Hanson wrote:
> However, I *do* think their bindings should be equivalent to those
> provided by (null-environment 4) and (null-environment 5). What makes
> you think they're different?
Never mind, I didn't read the standard correctly. They're fine.
Let's keep them, it seems to make sense to have them as modules
if they also are available as first-class environments.
Cheers,
Peter
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
- [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix r4rs, , r4rs-null and r5rs-null modules, Peter Bex, 2017/10/14
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix r4rs, , r4rs-null and r5rs-null modules, Peter Bex, 2017/10/14
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix r4rs, , r4rs-null and r5rs-null modules, Evan Hanson, 2017/10/15
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix r4rs, , r4rs-null and r5rs-null modules,
Peter Bex <=