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: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:28:51 +0000 Message-ID: <87hckbkpho.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> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1193599754 26188 80.91.229.12 (28 Oct 2007 19:29:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:29:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Guile Development To: Elf Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 28 20:29:16 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 1ImDor-0000CT-Bs for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 28 Oct 2007 20:29:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ImDoi-0007TG-7j for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 28 Oct 2007 15:29:00 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1ImDoe-0007TB-8k for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Oct 2007 15:28:56 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1ImDod-0007Sz-H9 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Oct 2007 15:28:55 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ImDod-0007Sw-B3 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Oct 2007 15:28:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mail3.uklinux.net ([80.84.72.33]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1ImDoc-0006cl-Ot for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Oct 2007 15:28:55 -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 A43EB1F66BC; Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:28:52 +0000 (GMT) Original-Received: from laruns (unknown [192.168.0.10]) by arudy (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFC3538009; Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:28:51 +0000 (GMT) In-Reply-To: (elf@ephemeral.net's message of "Sun, 28 Oct 2007 11:48:30 -0700 (PDT)") 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:6860 Archived-At: Many thanks for your quick response, and I appreciate your kind words about Guile. The specific issue that I mentioned is still present in 1.4.1, so if you've tried running the r5rs_pitfalls test with 1.4.1, it would fail for at least that reason; and I suspect there may be a couple of other issues that we've fixed since then. In case you do come across any R5 issues with the current Guile (1.8.x), please do let us know, as we really do want Guile to be R5RS-compliant. 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. Regards, Neil Elf writes: > for what its worth, i still start people off on guile 1.4.1 when i teach them > because a) the help system is excellent, b) i can show it to them in action > via scwm, and c) i have a very fond spot for guile, as its the first real > scheme implementation i used. most of my students have also found it to be > the easiest and most comfortable to work in initially. i did not mean > to offend or give misinformation about the current state of guile. my > most sincere apologies. > > -elf > > > On Sun, 28 Oct 2007, Neil Jerram wrote: > >> Elf writes: >> >>> (i usually start people off with guile nowadays, >>> despite its non-r5 compliance, as the wizard book is still around r4 material.) >> >> I hope you don't mind me emailing you in response to your r6rs post; >> I'm one of the Guile developers. >> >> I wondered if you could say more about the r5-non-compliance that you >> perceive? I thought we had solved all r5 compliance issues by now. >> >> (Last time I heard it claimed that Guile was not r5-compliant, I >> followed it up, and it was to do with a couple of tests relying on the >> order of evaluation of letrec initializers. But that is fixed now.) >> >> Many thanks, >> Neil >> _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel