From: Peter Kourzanov <peter.kourza...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [r6rs-discuss] [Scheme-reports] redefining eqv? Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 23:11:10 +0100
> On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 15:39 -0500, John Cowan wrote: >> Peter Kourzanov scripsit: >> >> > > Peter, the better way to do the kind of thing you are looking for >> > > is PARAMETERIZE. I wouldn't advocate it for CASE, though. >> > >> > Any pointers? Or is it the PLT/Racket thing? >> >> SRFI 39. >> > > So, RRS's (fluid) redux (or shall I say Rabbit redux). Its so > well-hidden I didn't know it existed. Any plans on going back > that for R7RS? Is SRFI such an obscure, hidden thing? Admittedly, referring to individual srfi by number is a bit forbidding for newcomers, but I've been thinking that popular(*) SRFIs are indispensable for those who consider using Scheme seriously. I'd prefer having a small core standard and rich SRFIs, but opinions may differ. (*) Which SRFI is popular? This is a bit outdated, but you can get an idea: http://practical-scheme.net/wiliki/schemexref.cgi/SRFI --shiro _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list r6rs-discuss@lists.r6rs.org http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss