Hi, Andreas Rottmann <a.rottm...@gmx.at> skribis:
> Not a hindrance, just an annoyance, IMHO. Maybe a reasonable compromise > would be to add an --r6rs switch, to add these extensions, as well as > turn on any R6RS-compatiblity reader options, so the script being > executed can use the R6RS syntax we already support, even when it is > disabled by default (cf. my latest patch). On the other hand, these > extensions are not part of R6RS and orthogonal to whether the script to > be run uses R6RS syntax incompatible with the default reader options. Yes, but still, a single --r6rs switch seems like a good tradeoff. Would you like to submit a patch? :-) Ludo’.
