[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Scheme-reports] R7RS 1st draft, initial environment and related notions
- To: Alex Shinn <alexshinn@x>
- Subject: Re: [Scheme-reports] R7RS 1st draft, initial environment and related notions
- From: Jussi Piitulainen <jpiitula@x>
- Date: 19 Apr 2011 18:34:39 +0300
- Cc: scheme-reports@x
- In-reply-to: <BANLkTin=xKM3aV2ho0dRLD7uOy5gw5Gfemail@example.com>
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <BANLkTin=xKM3aV2ho0dRLD7uOy5gw5Gfemail@example.com>
Alex Shinn writes:
> Hi, thanks for your comments.
Thanks for taking them into account. I will be sending more. I've been
reading these reports since R3RS.
By the way, the References section still says that Clinger's proper
tail recursion paper, , is _to appear_ ... in 1998.
Is the etiquette such that one replies to the sender and cc's the
list? I'm doing a follow-up in Gnus. I hope this keeps the archive
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 5:32 PM, Jussi Piitulainen
> <jpiitula@x> wrote:
> > What exactly is the initial environment (1.3.1. Base and optional
> > features; 4.1.3 Procedure calls, beginning of section 6. Standard
> > procedures) and what are the optional and required bindings
> > (6.6. Eval: scheme-report-environment)?
> The intention was the base script environment was empty,
> scheme-report-environment was (scheme base), and repls
> were an implementation-defined superset thereof. I've
> opened a new ticket for this.
Thanks. I'm not sure what a script environment is. Clarify that in the
report, too, unless it is something for the large language.
Scheme-reports mailing list