[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] SRFIs 11, 12, and 15
From: |
John Cowan |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] SRFIs 11, 12, and 15 |
Date: |
Sun, 1 Jan 2006 18:11:18 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.3.28i |
felix winkelmann scripsit:
> That's right. SRFI-11 is not supported completely, and 12 and 15 are withdrawn
> SRFIs. Currently the policy is to treat withdrawn SRFIs as nonexistant,
> and following from that, not to register feature-ID's for them. If you think
> treating them like finalized SRFIs is a better idea, then I can change that,
> of course.
The decision to withdraw or finalize is in the end solely in the hands of
the proposer. If you do implement a withdrawn SRFI, I see no reason not
to represent that you do so -- if my code does in fact depend on SRFI
12, I should be able to portably write (require-extension (srfi 12))
at the top of my code without provoking an error on a system that does
in fact implement it.
What's the difference between SRFI 11 and what Chicken provides?
--
I marvel at the creature: so secret and John Cowan
so sly as he is, to come sporting in the pool address@hidden
before our very window. Does he think that http://www.reutershealth.com
Men sleep without watch all night? --Faramir http://www.ccil.org/~cowan