[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Scheme-reports] [scheme-reports-wg1] John Cowan's votes on the sixth ballot

Alex Shinn <alexshinn@x> wrote:

> No, you're really not understanding.  The entire premise of
> the module system is that the library declarations and Scheme
> code live in two fundamentally different spaces.  You can
> import bindings like `import', `export' and `include' from
> libraries in any order and they won't conflict with the existing
> library declarations.

This is not correct. Systems like Chez Scheme implement the library system 
as part of the expander, making them a part of the Scheme language. This is 
intentional, and allows one to expand into libraries, which is a very 
useful thing to do, enabling user defined library extensions to be written 
without the need to hack the implementation. Making libraries a part of 
the language does not preclude the use of any of those identifiers in 
Scheme code for other purposes. 

Aaron W. Hsu | arcfide@x | http://www.sacrideo.us
Programming is just another word for the lost art of thinking.

Scheme-reports mailing list