Re: Optional features in SRFIs Lassi Kortela 24 Jan 2020 17:07 UTC
> The issue isn't with SRFIs as such, but with R7RS-small; there is no way > for an implementation to communicate to its callers what features it > does or does not support at or before compile time. In SRFI 115, for > example, there are various features that can be tested by cond-expand, > but this is not very helpful, because there is no portable way to add a > cond-expand feature. The R7RS version of cond-expand supports (library (foo bar)) expressions to test for a library that can be imported using (import (foo bar)). Would it work in principle to put part of the procedures in a SRFI into a separate library, or have I misunderstood how (library ...) works?