[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Scheme-reports] read-error? and file-error? should be part of their respective packages.
- To: arthur@x
- Subject: Re: [Scheme-reports] read-error? and file-error? should be part of their respective packages.
- From: John Cowan <cowan@x>
- Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 18:00:35 -0500
- Cc: scheme-reports@x
- In-reply-to: <28534524.219929.1352846624585.JavaMail.root@vms170027>
- References: <28534524.219929.1352846624585.JavaMail.root@vms170027>
Arthur Smyles scripsit:
> Both read-error? and file-error? are currently part of (scheme
> base). Since both the read procedure and file procedures are in
> separate libraries and are optional, it does not make sense to make
> these 2 procedures required. I propose that read-error? be part of the
> (scheme read) library, and that file-error? be part of the (scheme
> file) library.
That is an *excellent* idea, and I only wish we had thought of it.
Unfortunately, I have to say that it just comes too late in the process.
Fortunately, implementations that don't have the read and file libraries
can easily use these stubs:
(define (read-error? x) #f)
(define (file-error? x) #f)
John Cowan cowan@x http://ccil.org/~cowan
Heckler: "Go on, Al, tell 'em all you know. It won't take long."
Al Smith: "I'll tell 'em all we *both* know. It won't take any longer."
Scheme-reports mailing list