Scheme language standardization process
On Wed, 04 May 2011 10:55:41 -0400, Andre van Tonder <andre@x> wrote: > The Chez solution to this problem (multi-argument unquote) has been in > use for a > number of years by several large implementations. It has he advantage > of being > backwards compatible - existing programs not using multi-argument unquote > will not be broken. The macro is nontrivial but has been thoroughly > debugged > and tested over the course of years and can be copied and pasted into any > implementation, so the cost of adopting it is zero. And the > specification has already been written for R6RS and can be copied and > pasted > from there into the WG1 standard, again ast zero cost, if the editors so > decide. It is my opinion that this is the best choice that can be made > at this > point. These are all rather convincing points, IMO. On the other hand, does anyone know if there are alternative approaches currently implemented by complete implementations? Aaron W. Hsu -- Programming is just another word for the lost art of thinking. _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list Scheme-reports@x http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports