Hello, > I think that we have similar synaptical fireworks here. The actual > implementation and syntax should be a result of understanding the line of > reasoning in these theorem povers and checkers. So let my try to explain what > I'm heading. I will try to write a little about where I am in a few days and > we can continue the discussion then.
Great! > Shall we say that you implement a JIT compiler and I progress with the glil->c > stuff. I was uncertain an a little afraid that I toed you here. That sounds good. In general though, please don't worry about treading on my territory or anything like that. I will be happy as long as Guile gets new features, and I am fine not being the person who writes them. Noah
