This morning I stumbled across Appendix D to R6RS (, which
suggests that implementations provide an executable named scheme-script for
the purpose of executing portable scripts. It seems that Racket does not
currently provide such an executable. Should it? (Of course I understand
that Racket is not a Scheme implementation, but it does contain an R6RS

The rationale given in the report seems persuasive to me, having at least a
little bit of experience wrangling Unix-style scripts that try to be
somewhat portable. It seems like just making scheme-script an alias for the
racket executable would be sufficient.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
For more options, visit

Reply via email to