-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
> However, maintaining logical consistency is an important > goal in language design. The main goal of specifying a > language is not to make the job of the compiler writer > easy. If that was the goal we could adopt "C". We > should make a language we like. The compiler writers I > know are surely good enough to handle small complexities > like this. I must admit, I've come to agree, despite having voted for the r6rs approach in http://trac.sacrideo.us/wg/wiki/WG1Ballot3Results; I think, at the time, I was distracted about defining equivalence of procedures in the full that-would-mean-solving-the-halting-problem sense, but we can have a workable definition of eqv? based on the point in time of closure creation - and I certainly don't see how compilers can have any trouble reconciling that with inlining. One for R8RS, eh? :-) ABS - -- Alaric Snell-Pym http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/alaric/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJRgOvsAAoJENVnbn/DjbpJq6EP/0mbZAbMiKhkLh0KB3seMEK8 +xffdpPK+bUhfJitDLRRD7zNnkblUjxr60hSQuBx2fcD4+1sFGlGsnTPc7sHHXx9 Zbsh00+LPRmR6HLk5Mu5E2zOtZYy1CqLThqw/Dz2Qj4y5wN6qCJVi7sKuqp6Cyd2 4O6rc2HHsKrcJ70ysWWdLYGU3Sxpaah4eYkD3P5H4CVBIV+ojJfiOOm0hMHDFuGR MiNK04mFWKB6Rgwy7/MfeMP9K9BVlOYTpatrI5cGXK1WgiQf3gXmzTAlQi7BCF0W TciPEFUKbhCrkuPJDwA5wD78lG0rOl4abRAZf5TSnWyJQ8S7Ip2LWEOnYsPCGlK6 wlXnzTPVVpM+lmFjAEU1Ol8HMTaDDkfYalbVGKe2D6n4Dt6MQdYT0lijfO8UkUx/ uuQWDaqtQMBxiDzDl3PoSXoWMUUX8fI/NE+lFOd0ngaBqRva1BFhZj2OTybF6iox uf8GmurpXCitN2mdyl0pG6+f8NUMaeEjkDFzjXH6v1VOWMXnYSYvcTkilkF8Pm0X orjXq5N9emYklJXdmQxjwdPifA2jJilAr7wwye1WkrDcbOU/VSeKGc9DngQKxrzR VtNv27T78EZowPRjrbdxGfJHoaRWWYeDzr9rHXWpOyBZaZpsgRhYHy4rMTSzCnrp +oLvE4CAgSLyso1Fmgx6 =BEW4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
