On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 4:51 PM, John J Foerch <jjfoe...@earthlink.net>

I ran into a little problem when working with the r6rs-bytevectors egg,
> which provides an r7rs implementation of (r6rs bytevectors).  The
> bytevector-copy! procedure has a different call signature in r6 than in
> r7, and I found that as r6rs-bytevectors is currently written, its
> bytevector-copy! always shadows or overrides the bytevector-copy! from
> r7rs.

The assumption is that because you've imported r6rs-bytevectors explicitly,
the R6RS behavior is what you actually want.  This is the only place where
R6RS and R7RS differ in argument order that is not automatically
detectable.  Larceny provides a combined (r7r6) library that imports
everything from both standards, except that the R6RS version of
bytevector-copy! comes in as r6rs:bytevector-copy!.

John Cowan          http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan        co...@ccil.org
Mr. Henry James writes fiction as if it were a painful duty.  --Oscar Wilde
Chicken-users mailing list

Reply via email to