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

Re: [Scheme-reports] Standard Feature Identifiers are too low-level

To: Marc Feeley <feeley@x>
Subject: Re: [Scheme-reports] Standard Feature Identifiers are too low-level
From: Andy Wingo <wingo@x>
Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2012 15:58:50 -0500
Cc: John Cowan <cowan@x>, scheme-reports <scheme-reports@x>
In-reply-to: <9A2D903E-A2E9-4AE3-B363-F95545F8F858@iro.umontreal.ca> (Marc Feeley's message of "Wed, 4 Jan 2012 14:34:21 -0500")
References: <BF4D24DB-77A6-42DF-A35F-FCC92BAD3849@iro.umontreal.ca> <20120103205118.GB14957@mercury.ccil.org> <BCB7F29A-C7F7-4B81-8558-11A55941BCC1@iro.umontreal.ca> <20120104183258.GB9128@mercury.ccil.org> <D118174E-20A6-4585-BAA7-0E745A88A4D8@iro.umontreal.ca> <20120104190241.GC9128@mercury.ccil.org> <9A2D903E-A2E9-4AE3-B363-F95545F8F858@iro.umontreal.ca>

On Wed 04 Jan 2012 14:34, Marc Feeley <feeley@x> writes:

> why not defer the specification of these feature identifiers to
> R7RS-large, if and when they are actually needed?

FWIW, I very much agree.

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@x
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Scheme-reports] Standard Feature Identifiers are too low-level
  - From: Alex Queiroz <asandroq@x>

References:
- [Scheme-reports] Standard Feature Identifiers are too low-level
  - From: Marc Feeley <feeley@x>
- Re: [Scheme-reports] Standard Feature Identifiers are too low-level
  - From: John Cowan <cowan@x>
- Re: [Scheme-reports] Standard Feature Identifiers are too low-level
  - From: Marc Feeley <feeley@x>
- Re: [Scheme-reports] Standard Feature Identifiers are too low-level
  - From: John Cowan <cowan@x>
- Re: [Scheme-reports] Standard Feature Identifiers are too low-level
  - From: Marc Feeley <feeley@x>
- Re: [Scheme-reports] Standard Feature Identifiers are too low-level
  - From: John Cowan <cowan@x>
- Re: [Scheme-reports] Standard Feature Identifiers are too low-level
  - From: Marc Feeley <feeley@x>

Prev by Date: Re: [Scheme-reports] Standard Feature Identifiers are too low-level
Next by Date: Re: [Scheme-reports] Standard Feature Identifiers are too low-level
Previous by thread: Re: [Scheme-reports] Standard Feature Identifiers are too low-level
Next by thread: Re: [Scheme-reports] Standard Feature Identifiers are too low-level
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread