[ERR5RS] Bindings in R5RS vs R6RS

[William Clinger]

Lynn Winebarger quoting Andre van Tonder:
> > 1) One should give a simple characterization, as
> > close to R5RS as possible, of portable programs
> > whose meaning is the same in /both/ dynamic and
> > compiler-based systems.
> >
>      Can you identify some compiler-based systems
> that would be faced with serious hardship by
> forcing REPL semantics?  

Almost all Scheme compilers have a mode in which
they generate inline code for calls to selected
standard procedures such as car and +.  In many
cases this code is the default, even though it
is generally incompatible with R5RS top-level
semantics, because the strictly conforming R5RS
mode involves considerable loss of performance.

Programs that do not redefine any of Scheme's
standard procedures behave the same in both
modes.  That's an example of what Andre was
advocating: a simple, precise description of
programs that behave the same in different
semantic modes.

Andre's ideas are well though out, and I'd like
to see him proceed on the basis of what he has
proposed.

Will



       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. 
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545433