From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Keith Wright Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: [EXT] Can guile be implementation independent? Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2021 15:03:01 -0500 Message-ID: <87r1a84b2i.fsf@fcs22.keithdiane.us> References: <91c20674-e4e7-ae31-c33f-072c566312bf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="11230"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" To: guile-user@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 19 21:03:30 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-user@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mz2P4-0002jt-IC for guile-user@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 21:03:30 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42412 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mz2P2-00032p-Vg for guile-user@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 15:03:28 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:60778) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mz2Ou-00032f-1N for guile-user@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 15:03:20 -0500 Original-Received: from dsl.keithdiane.us ([66.92.74.188]:38704) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mz2Os-0000hY-GS for guile-user@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 15:03:19 -0500 Original-Received: from fcs22.keithdiane.us (fcs22.keithdiane.us [192.168.1.121]) by fcs19.keithdiane.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19E7A218375; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 15:03:02 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <91c20674-e4e7-ae31-c33f-072c566312bf@gmail.com> (message from Taylan Kammer on Sat, 18 Dec 2021 18:10:58 +0100) Received-SPF: pass client-ip=66.92.74.188; envelope-from=kwright@keithdiane.us; helo=dsl.keithdiane.us X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "guile-user" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.lisp.guile.user:17877 Archived-At: Taylan Kammer writes: > On 17.12.2021 18:05, Thompson, David wrote: >> >> I think the shortest and easiest answer to this question, >> in practice, is "no." >> >> I prefer to think of each Scheme implementation as its own distinct >> language, I hope not. > The RnRS have some severe limitations. In all RnRS: > > - No TCP/IP > - No POSIX or Win32 > - No threads > > In R7RS-small, and R5RS and earlier: > > - No hash tables > - No sub-typing Do we recoginize a distinction between core language and libraries? Thien-Thi Nguyen writes: >> I wonder why your releases all seem to target Guile 2 >> Will this also work with Guile 3? > > New Stuff gets my attention sooner when it is kind to Old Stuff. Q: Can portable code be run with Guile? A: If you have to ask Guile-2 or Guile-3 then you can't do it. (But TTN might.) -- Keith