On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 8:31 AM, Thomas Bushnell, BSG <[email protected]> wrote: > > Insanity. If it will be a portable library that places no burden on > implementors, then it doesn't even need to be in the standard.
This is for WG2, the "large" standard. The whole point of WG2 is to provide standard libraries. If you don't think libraries matter, free to ignore the WG2 effort and only concern yourself with WG1. > How do you think it will genuinely place no burden on implementors? Because they can just use the reference implementation. -- Alex _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
