Scheme language standardization process
On Monday, July 04, 2011 08:39:05 pm John Cowan wrote: > Come up with a good answer and I'll have the question reopened. This just illustrates why choosing a syntax that is not backwards compatible with R6RS, yet is a feature subset of it is a bad idea. This issue wouldn't exist if we took the subset of features in R6RS that we currently use and use the R6RS syntax. 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