From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Neil Jerram Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: [r6rs-discuss] Implementors' intentions concerning R6RS Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 21:51:53 +0000 Message-ID: <87ejfd7fnq.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> References: <818B5317-4F09-46F3-9376-43292CEB3C16@iro.umontreal.ca> <200710261850.l9QIo8Vu017241@garbo.cs.indiana.edu> <47229C5E.8070406@emf.net> <87640rm7ec.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> <87hckbkpho.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> <87d4uykkes.fsf@laas.fr> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1193694745 14887 80.91.229.12 (29 Oct 2007 21:52:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 21:52:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Elf To: Guile Development Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 29 22:52:26 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1ImcWt-0003jF-EZ for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 22:52:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ImcWk-0002JL-5D for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:52:06 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1ImcWg-0002Hi-UG for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:52:02 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1ImcWd-0002Aq-6r for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:52:00 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ImcWd-0002Ab-1z for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:51:59 -0400 Original-Received: from mail3.uklinux.net ([80.84.72.33]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1ImcWc-0002Oe-HZ for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:51:58 -0400 Original-Received: from arudy (host86-145-152-23.range86-145.btcentralplus.com [86.145.152.23]) by mail3.uklinux.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E32421F699E; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 21:51:54 +0000 (GMT) Original-Received: from laruns (unknown [192.168.0.10]) by arudy (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B96438009; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 21:51:54 +0000 (GMT) In-Reply-To: <87d4uykkes.fsf@laas.fr> (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s's?= message of "Mon, 29 Oct 2007 16:30:51 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.4-2.6 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:6864 Archived-At: ludovic.courtes@laas.fr (Ludovic Court=E8s) writes: > Hi, > > Neil Jerram writes: > >> FWIW, my feeling about R6 as a whole is that it is not aligned with >> Guile's objective - remembering that the latter is not just to be a >> Scheme implementation, but a Scheme implementation in the form of an >> embeddable library that is useful for extending applications. But my >> thoughts on this haven't fully crystallised yet. > > Speaking of this, I hope you (Guile developers) don't mind my answer to > Marc Feeley wrt. R6RS, which he posted on `r6rs-discuss' [0]. We > haven't had a debate about it here, but I'd be glad if we had one. Well I didn't mind. I was happy to see that Marc had received a statement from "Guile", and I'm happy with what you said. > BTW, as time passes, I am more and more doubtful about the "embeddable > library" argument. After all, if we work on a Scheme implementation, > that's certainly because we want to write Scheme. Sure we want to make > it easy to interface with existing code written in C, but we also want > to write *more* Scheme code. ^ Agreed up to here... > With that goal in mind, the pure > interpreter approach is not sustainable ... but I don't see what you mean by this. Regards, Neil _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel