Email list hosting service & mailing list manager

(Previous discussion continued)
Re: SRFI 170: 270 days John Cowan (06 Feb 2020 03:52 UTC)
Re: SRFI 170: 270 days Arthur A. Gleckler (06 Feb 2020 05:51 UTC)
CWD and other unresolved issues Lassi Kortela (07 Feb 2020 15:34 UTC)
Re: CWD and other unresolved issues John Cowan (07 Feb 2020 15:42 UTC)
Re: CWD and other unresolved issues Lassi Kortela (07 Feb 2020 15:47 UTC)
Re: CWD and other unresolved issues John Cowan (07 Feb 2020 18:04 UTC)
Re: CWD and other unresolved issues Arthur A. Gleckler (07 Feb 2020 18:48 UTC)
Re: CWD and other unresolved issues Per Bothner (07 Feb 2020 18:57 UTC)
(missing)
Re: CWD and other unresolved issues Per Bothner (08 Feb 2020 07:33 UTC)
Pathnames and URIs Lassi Kortela (08 Feb 2020 09:12 UTC)
Re: Pathnames and URIs Lassi Kortela (08 Feb 2020 09:20 UTC)
Re: CWD and other unresolved issues John Cowan (08 Feb 2020 18:57 UTC)
Pathname representations Lassi Kortela (07 Feb 2020 22:19 UTC)
Re: Pathname representations Per Bothner (07 Feb 2020 22:31 UTC)
Re: Pathname representations Arthur A. Gleckler (07 Feb 2020 22:36 UTC)
Re: Pathname representations Lassi Kortela (07 Feb 2020 22:50 UTC)
Re: Pathname representations John Cowan (08 Feb 2020 07:02 UTC)
Re: CWD and other unresolved issues John Cowan (07 Feb 2020 19:01 UTC)
Re: CWD and other unresolved issues Arthur A. Gleckler (07 Feb 2020 19:19 UTC)
Re: CWD and other unresolved issues Marc Feeley (07 Feb 2020 20:14 UTC)

CWD and other unresolved issues Lassi Kortela 07 Feb 2020 15:34 UTC

I could also take another look at the draft.

We discussed adding 170 to Gambit with Marc, and he again made the case
that requiring the Scheme CWD to be equal to the OS CWD is not practical
for multi-threaded programs.

Would it make sense to add language to the SRFI saying that
implementations may use pathnames relative to a custom CWD if they want to?