Re: upcoming revision, need feedback
R. Kent Dybvig
(11 Jan 2010 20:52 UTC)
|
Re: upcoming revision, need feedback
Derick Eddington
(12 Jan 2010 02:11 UTC)
|
Re: upcoming revision, need feedback
R. Kent Dybvig
(12 Jan 2010 03:52 UTC)
|
Re: upcoming revision, need feedback
Thomas Bushnell BSG
(12 Jan 2010 04:24 UTC)
|
Re: upcoming revision, need feedback
Derick Eddington
(12 Jan 2010 06:18 UTC)
|
Re: upcoming revision, need feedback
Thomas Bushnell BSG
(12 Jan 2010 06:27 UTC)
|
Re: upcoming revision, need feedback
Derick Eddington
(12 Jan 2010 07:05 UTC)
|
Re: upcoming revision, need feedback
Thomas Bushnell BSG
(12 Jan 2010 07:16 UTC)
|
Re: upcoming revision, need feedback Derick Eddington (12 Jan 2010 09:00 UTC)
|
Re: upcoming revision, need feedback
R. Kent Dybvig
(27 Jan 2010 20:58 UTC)
|
Re: upcoming revision, need feedback
Derick Eddington
(28 Jan 2010 00:45 UTC)
|
Re: upcoming revision, need feedback
Vitaly Magerya
(28 Jan 2010 10:39 UTC)
|
Re: upcoming revision, need feedback
Derick Eddington
(28 Jan 2010 17:45 UTC)
|
On Mon, 2010-01-11 at 23:16 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > On Mon, 2010-01-11 at 23:05 -0800, Derick Eddington wrote: > > I think the rest of your message is failing to understand the purpose of > > this SRFI. > > > > Why do you suppose C has never specified any mapping between #include <> > directives and directory layouts? Not even Posix has one. This has not > hampered C's usability or portability. I don't think I'm familiar enough to say. I do know what the current situation with R6RS library files on Unixoids and Windoze is: the names and directory structure of library files, not their source-code contents, are not fully portable because different R6RS systems do not implement the same method of finding them, and this SRFI will fix that. -- : Derick ----------------------------------------------------------------