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

[Alex Shinn <alexshinn@x>]

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Andre van Tonder <andre@x> wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Aug 2011, Alex Shinn wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Andre van Tonder <andre@x>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, 4 Aug 2011, Alex Shinn wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's the environment programs start with.
>>>>
>>>> The result is that any program can be cut&paste into
>>>> an interactive REPL and still work, and any interactive
>>>> session can be saved and used as a program, so long
>>>> as it's prefixed with (import (scheme base)).
>>>
>>> Even if the program contains imports conflicting with prior imports or
>>> bindings in the REPL (assuming as John does a non-empty REPL), or
>>> redefinitions of bindings previously imported into the REPL?
>>
>> No, the reverse direction (interactive->batch) is not  guaranteed.
>
> I don't know what this means.

Sorry, I'll try to clarify later, but it's not normative,
it's more of a rationale.  You should always be able
to run a program directly in the REPL.

-- 
Alex

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