Re: [Scheme-reports] Draft 3 Comments: Chapter 6

[Alex Shinn <alexshinn@x>]

On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Andre van Tonder <andre@x> wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Aug 2011, Alex Shinn wrote:
>
>> if an
>> implementation provides a REPL, it provides at least
>> (scheme base) by default.
>
> What if a user wants to interactively develop programs in which some of the
> bindings in (scheme base) are unbound or have different meanings from the
> standard?  It does not seem as if your proposed REPL is suitable for this.

This is a special case, and for the most part it won't make
any difference unless there are auxiliary keyword conflicts.

We do provide a way for the user to write their own REPL
with precise bindings using (environment ...), which is
probably the best way to handle that situation.  But every
implementation out there initializes their REPLs with
a set of bindings, and students expect to be able to
run simple examples when presented with a prompt,
so I don't think we can specify the initial REPL is empty.

-- 
Alex

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