[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-hackers] require, require-extension-for-syntax, and the ini

From: John Cowan
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] require, require-extension-for-syntax, and the initial macro environment
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2018 16:49:02 -0400

On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:55 PM, Peter Bex <address@hidden> wrote:
I'm not sure why we still need these (probably because require-extension
is a SRFI (55)?).

As a SRFI fan, I still say flush it.  SRFI 55 isn't very portable: besides Chicken, where it began, it spread only to Gauche, Guile, SISC, STklos, SigScheme.
But honestly, I think it's better to just drop require-extension-for-syntax
and perhaps even require-extension.

Let's drop both.
One more question: Where should we document "the initial (nameless) macro
environment"?  For example, cond-expand and module and such need a place
to be documented too, and they're strictly speaking not part of a module
(but it's weird to have to look them up somewhere completely different).

What all do we need besides import and module?
;; TODO: Eventually, cond-expand should move to the
;; (chicken base) module to match r7rs.  Keeping it in the initial env
;; makes it a whole lot easier to write portable CHICKEN 4 & 5 code.

Fair enough.  Note that there are two cond-expands in R7RS: one in R7RS library language, and one that is a Scheme _expression_.

John Cowan        address@hidden
You are a child of the universe no less than the trees and all other acyclic
graphs; you have a right to be here.  --DeXiderata by Sean McGrath

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]