[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Scheme-reports] Checking implementation features and Scheme name?
- To: Alex Shinn <alexshinn@x>
- Subject: Re: [Scheme-reports] Checking implementation features and Scheme name?
- From: Shiro Kawai <shiro.kawai@x>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2012 23:25:41 -1000
- Cc: scheme-reports <scheme-reports@x>
- In-reply-to: <CAMMPzYNNZ-eO0gkky=DnO6m0nL6wLXL4cwyy06Y5tujKwid5eg@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <20120102095211.GA27647@socrates.lan> <CAMMPzYNNZ-eO0gkky=DnO6m0nL6wLXL4cwyy06Y5tujKwid5eg@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Alex Shinn <alexshinn@x> wrote:
> Given these are minor cases I think it's a more
> appropriate feature for the large language.
Or another srfi. Something similar to Common Lisp's
lisp-implementation-type and
lisp-implementation-version can be a small srfi that most
implementations can easily provide.
_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@x
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports