[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Scheme-reports] "Language Changes"
- To: scheme-reports <scheme-reports@x>
- Subject: [Scheme-reports] "Language Changes"
- From: Andy Wingo <wingo@x>
- Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2013 22:57:37 +0100
Regarding "Other language changes since R5RS", there are a couple points
regarding syntax definitions being allowed anywhere. The second one
(internal syntax definitions) is probably redundant.
I would change the "Incompatibilities with R6RS" to "Differences from
R6RS", and be a lot less snarky and defensive. Simply state the
differences. Phrases like "the WG considers extensibility to be
important" add nothing. I wouldn't even try to justify things -- there
are so many points...
I would also remove the section on incompatibilities with the r6rs
standard libraries document. It's out of scope, really -- there is no
need to mention syntax-case at all.
Dunno. The section on R6RS needs some work, otherwise the document ends
on a half-finished, sour note to me.
Scheme-reports mailing list