Re: [Chicken-users] basic Scheme question

[Shawn Rutledge]

On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 12:31 PM, John Cowan <address@hidden> wrote:
> Shawn Rutledge scripsit:
>
>> [W]hy should I have to re-create functionality which is one of the
>> most basic features of Scheme (being able to look up symbols and get
>> values bound to them)
>
> Actually, it isn't: Scheme has no such facility.  Symbols in Scheme
> have no properties except their print names.  (In Chicken and Chez,
> but not in most other Schemes, they also have a p-list which you can
> exploit for the environment I mentioned in my last posting.)  It's true
> that Scheme binds *identifiers* to values, but there is no requirement
> that identifiers are represented by symbols, or at all, at run time.

Thanks for the explanation.