Re: [Chicken-hackers] R6RS

[Thomas Bushnell BSG]

On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 23:28 +0100, Alaric Snell-Pym wrote:
> On 3 Aug 2009, at 7:31 pm, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> 
> > But r6rs has been out a while.  I think we should create a "punchlist"
> > of to-do items, with the goal being to get r6rs compliance in the
> > not-too-distant future.  With the version 4 macro system in place,
> > this
> > shouldn't be too far off.
> >
> > And yet, we have a quote from Felix Winkelmann from a couple years ago
> > saying it will never happen, and "R6RS must die".
> 
> R6RS has been a controversial standard in the Scheme community, and
> one that many wish to boycott. Just because a standard is more recent,
> doesn't necessarily mean it's better; I, for one, would rather use an
> R5RS scheme than R6RS.

So is this just label for label's sake?  Given that your r5rs program
will run in r6rs, can you explain why an r6rs Scheme is a bad thing for
you?

Thomas