Re: [Scheme-reports] Proposal to add fexprs

[John Cowan <cowan@x>]

musicdenotation@x scripsit:

> Anyway, you can specify fexprs as an optional part of the language,
> so that anyone interested can implement it.

(parameterize ((chair-hat #t)

As far as I know, there are no implementations of fexprs in any Scheme
today.  (Implementations of Kernel don't count for this purpose.)  If you
or someone else puts together a proposal *with an implementation* and
gets it through the SRFI process, then WG2 can consider it.  Note the SRFI
requirements at <http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-process.html#structure>.

)

Someone asked about what `apply` does with fexprs.  In classic Lisps,
fexprs don't know anything about where their operands come from any more
than other procedures do, so the environment at the point of application
is used to interpret variables, there being in fact no other.  In Kernel,
it is a domain error to invoke `apply` on a fexpr.

-- 
Yes, chili in the eye is bad, but so is your    John Cowan
ear.  However, I would suggest you wash your    cowan@x
hands thoroughly before going to the toilet.    http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
        --gadicath

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