On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 02:45:02PM -0400, John Cowan wrote: > Peter Bex scripsit: > > > The other way around it does shut out implementations like Chicken > > where the "er-macro-transformer" line is more or less optional because > > that's its native system. > > Chicken is not shut out. It just means that WG2-conformant programs > have to use "er-macro-transformer" explicitly. What happens if you > don't use an explicit transformer is outside the scope of the standard,
Right, but Andy is advocating to standardize that unless I completely misunderstood. > so Chicken can treat that as implicit ER and other implementations as > something else. > > This is the advantage of standardizing a facade rather than what lies > beneath. Indeed. Cheers, Peter -- http://sjamaan.ath.cx -- "The process of preparing programs for a digital computer is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic experience much like composing poetry or music." -- Donald Knuth _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
