|
Review of first draft
John Cowan
(20 Apr 2020 14:11 UTC)
|
|
Re: Review of first draft
Lassi Kortela
(20 Apr 2020 15:02 UTC)
|
|
Re: Review of first draft
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(20 Apr 2020 15:19 UTC)
|
|
Re: Review of first draft
Lassi Kortela
(20 Apr 2020 15:35 UTC)
|
|
Re: Review of first draft
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(20 Apr 2020 15:45 UTC)
|
|
Loading code from standard input
Lassi Kortela
(20 Apr 2020 16:01 UTC)
|
|
Re: Loading code from standard input
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(20 Apr 2020 16:30 UTC)
|
|
Re: Loading code from standard input
Lassi Kortela
(20 Apr 2020 16:49 UTC)
|
|
Re: Loading code from standard input
John Cowan
(20 Apr 2020 17:36 UTC)
|
|
Re: Loading code from standard input
Lassi Kortela
(26 May 2020 12:38 UTC)
|
|
Re: Loading code from standard input
John Cowan
(26 May 2020 17:36 UTC)
|
|
Re: Loading code from standard input
Lassi Kortela
(26 May 2020 17:45 UTC)
|
|
Re: Loading code from standard input
John Cowan
(26 May 2020 17:52 UTC)
|
|
Re: Loading code from standard input Lassi Kortela (26 May 2020 18:06 UTC)
|
|
Re: Loading code from standard input
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(26 May 2020 18:12 UTC)
|
|
Re: Loading code from standard input
Lassi Kortela
(26 May 2020 18:50 UTC)
|
|
Re: Loading code from standard input
Vladimir Nikishkin
(27 May 2020 07:48 UTC)
|
|
Re: Loading code from standard input
Lassi Kortela
(27 May 2020 08:07 UTC)
|
|
Re: Review of first draft
John Cowan
(20 Apr 2020 16:02 UTC)
|
> By "script" I mean a program that is executed by a REPL even though it
> comes from a file. From R7RS section 5.7, last paragraph:
>
> An implementation may provide a mode of operation in which the REPL
> reads its input from a file. Such a file is not, in general, the same as
> a program, because it can contain import declarations in places other
> than the beginning.
Right. I didn't realize "REPL from a file" is specified separately. Is
this the mode that (load "file.scm") uses?
> Whether expressions appearing in such a script are printed or not is
> left open. "chibi-scheme <foo" treats the file foo as a script, whereas
> "chibi-scheme foo" treats it as a program.
It might be worth to de-facto standardize this after the fact, but
that's probably out of scope for SRFI 193. What should we do in 193?
Code read from standard input cannot be a "script" in 193's current
terminology since it doesn't have a filename. ("/dev/stdin" is not
appropriate since it's non-portable and not a regular file.)
I guess it can be a "command" though that would be a bit bizarre.