On Monday, July 04, 2011 08:39:05 pm John Cowan wrote:
> Come up with a good answer and I'll have the question reopened.
This just illustrates why choosing a syntax that is not backwards compatible
with R6RS, yet is a feature subset of it is a bad idea. This issue wouldn't
exist if we took the subset of features in R6RS that we currently use and use
the R6RS syntax.
Aaron W. Hsu
--
Programming is just another word for the lost art of thinking.
_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
