[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [r6rs-discuss] Implementors' intentions concerning R6RS

From: Elf
Subject: Re: [r6rs-discuss] Implementors' intentions concerning R6RS
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 11:29:50 -0700 (PDT)

On Sun, 28 Oct 2007, Neil Jerram wrote:

Elf <address@hidden> writes:

(i usually start people off with guile nowadays,
despite its non-r5 compliance, as the wizard book is still around r4 material.)

I hope you don't mind me emailing you in response to your r6rs post;
I'm one of the Guile developers.

I wondered if you could say more about the r5-non-compliance that you
perceive?  I thought we had solved all r5 compliance issues by now.

(Last time I heard it claimed that Guile was not r5-compliant, I
followed it up, and it was to do with a couple of tests relying on the
order of evaluation of letrec initializers.  But that is fixed now.)

Many thanks,

apologies.  im slightly out of date with my guile versions (i last used guile
hardcore around 1.4/1.6) so my information is incorrect.  guile is fully
r5 compliant now to the best of my knowledge.  (scwm still uses 1.4.1, which
is why i still use 1.4.1)  no offense intended.


reply via email to

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